|
|
Post by dolly on May 22, 2007 23:32:49 GMT -5
i've been giving the 'attraction to pain' question some thought, and truly, i think no. i don't believe there is an underlying attraction to pain at the root of my devness. because i've been drawn to people with disabilities as far back as i can remember, way before it had any sexual connotation. and i don't remember associating disability with physical or mental pain in any way. i was just attracted to the 'difference'.
it's an interesting theory, cake. and i'm curious how many might feel a connection with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Triassic on May 23, 2007 1:28:14 GMT -5
I remember a lot of discussion along these lines about two years ago, when someone confessed to liking to watch wheelers struggle to do things. Also I started that thread 'Tales From The Dark Side'...about the more, oh, 'questionable' interests of deevs(my new word  ). As for 'sweet pain'(I keep hearing Lou Reed's "Sweet Jane"), I think it's a very apt, poetic term. It's a bit off topic, but I have a personal theory that orgasm-just in and of itself- may ACTUALLY be a form of pain. I asked myself this question; if you could instantly trigger an orgasm anytime, anywhere, with nothing sexual going on, no erection, no ejaculation, just 'Zzzap!' orgasm...would you? And my answer was hell no! It would be a very weird, unsettling feeling. So to me that means that coming really derives most if not all of it's 'pleasure' from contextual factors, as it were. |
|
|
|
Post by Ouch on May 23, 2007 8:00:14 GMT -5
I remember watching this episode of whatever (a medical show), and there was a woman, who actually had the problem of having repetitive orgasms beyond her control...sorta' like Tri was saying.
What I meant about the 'sympathy' thing, is that perhaps there is some trigger going off that signals a 'nursing' reaction so to speak...which is subliminal, but fuels into conscious-brain thought as an attraction (the signal manifests as a simpler, easier to understand 'emotion' from the primal 'instinct') toward disability...it would be impossible for any of you to really acknowledge if it was going on or not, because you wouldn't be conscious to it, as the process would only give you the net result of attraction.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ive on May 23, 2007 12:32:26 GMT -5
Freud had its good things but also he thought that women, who most probably were sexually abused as children, were 'hysterical'.
Anais (have you read Collette? you would like her). you describe interesting experiences, writing about the subject without it being sexual at 14 makes sense, you probably didn't have any experiendes with sex at that age! But your hormones were kicking in! like the once a month thing, probably your testosterone is higher then (women do have a bit of testosterone i am sure you know).
Well, i think it's a fetish, like a foot fetish, spanking, and i don't think there is anything wrong with any of it! Maybe it's genetic, maybe from a previous life!
I am also in the mental health field and many of my clients that came in with various fetishes did not have childhood experineces to explain it. Specially the spanking women; some of them had been spanked as children, others not at all! so? who knows?
Enjoy.
|
|
anais
Junior Member
Posts: 66
|
Post by anais on May 23, 2007 14:17:34 GMT -5
Ive, what I was trying to say, is that my sex experiences and my devo experiences, are different, although I guess both of them involve testoseron (in addition to other hormones and neurotransmitors). Therefore, I don't believe it to be a fetish. As far as I know, fetishism can be "diagnosed" in a case where a person can't function sexually without the object of his attraction, thus this object replaces the subject in his relationships. Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think this is a case for most of the devos here. It is more like an additional interest, which unlike fetishism that narrows, broadens the spectrum of our emotional and sexual experiences. I also don't know whether there are devos who feel like attending a therapy because of there devoteeism. Fetishists coming to you probably suffer from some kind of distress or disfunction as a result of their fetishism- don't remember reading here about suffering devotees, but again, I might be wrong. You probably know, that sexual fetishism is diagnosed by the DSM or ICD only when other criteria for paraphilia are met, part of which is suffering or doing harm to others, so I don't think you are clinically allowed to diagnose us without priorly checking other aspects of our sexual functioning. In any case, labelling something as a fetish doesn't lead to any interesting or insightful discourse, framing it in a restricted box- what's the point in it?
P.S- if you don't believe in childhood origins of adult psychic phenomena, why did you bother to mention that the "hysterical" women probably were abused as children? Perhaps they were "hysterical" geneticly or from previous lifes?
|
|
|
|
Post by Cake on May 23, 2007 16:19:18 GMT -5
I remember watching this episode of whatever (a medical show), and there was a woman, who actually had the problem of having repetitive orgasms beyond her control...sorta' like Tri was saying. What I meant about the 'sympathy' thing, is that perhaps there is some trigger going off that signals a 'nursing' reaction so to speak...which is subliminal, but fuels into conscious-brain thought as an attraction (the signal manifests as a simpler, easier to understand 'emotion' from the primal 'instinct') toward disability...it would be impossible for any of you to really acknowledge if it was going on or not, because you wouldn't be conscious to it, as the process would only give you the net result of attraction. That's quite what I meant, thank you wind. And I say it again: If there is an attraction to pain, or "nursing the pain", we won't automatically acknowledge it. It is, as windrider says, subliminal. So even if you think, or "feel" that there's no attraction to it, it still can be there. I probably have to clarify something about my theory here: It wasn't meant to indicate that the attraction to disability is ONLY because of the pain. All I'm trying to say is that it could be one important aspect of our devness. But then, I think, everyone of is different. The question of all our questions, "What made me a devotee?" can be answered, but I think the answer wouldn't be the same for all of us. Whether it's the father, which for most women influences their relationship with men, or what ever else. Dolly, as for what you say about having been attracted to disabilities since your earliest childhood, I can only agree with you. I think every dev has always been a dev. And yet there has to be a reason, and this reason has to either lie in some cosmical magic or in our earliest experiences as a child. Even a new born absorbs a huge amount of all kind of things. I think I know what made me a devotee, even though I still can't explain how the hell it could "happen" while I was still a little child. As for the attraction to pain, I don't know its place in the whole story, I just know it has to be there, it's only logical, in my opinion. What triassic said is very interesting, too. I've thought about it and I think he's right. When i think about times in my life when I wasn't happy with myself, when I felt like not wanting to be loved, orgasms really did, kind of, "hurt". I've never had problems to have one, but having an orgasm doesn't necessarily mean you I can also enjoy it. It just doesn't feel right in this moment; just as if I couldn't allow myself to enjoy. And when I now compare this feeling to the "sweet pain", I think I can see some familiarity. Geeeze, this is so complicated. To much aspects crying for attention  |
|
|
|
Post by matisse on May 23, 2007 21:18:07 GMT -5
If the attraction is that strong, why are so many devs not with wheeler SO's, and so many wheelers without SO's? I can see how that would happen pre-internet, but now it would seem that as long as people are willing to travel, there should be a lot more wheeler/dev relationships.
|
|
|
|
Post by BA on May 23, 2007 21:50:45 GMT -5
That IS the money question isn't it?
|
|
|
|
Post by Triassic on May 24, 2007 0:32:47 GMT -5
Well, attraction is one thing; actually really fitting a big as life wheeler into your world may be quite another. There are lots of logistical problems; not to mention dealing with the reactions of your AB colleagues....altho this may be less trouble than expected.
Plus, it's just tough to make that move sometimes. I still kick myself for not following through w/this cute chica in a Kmart like 5 years ago. She was cute, friendly, and am sure was indeed a dev...but I choked.
It's still up to the guy to take the lead, disability or no.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ouch on May 24, 2007 8:46:58 GMT -5
Well I think Tri partially explains it with the 'logistical' thing, which actually isn't that hard of an answer for a million dollar question.
...but logistics does play a key role in it, as well as statistics...and the nature of devoism as well. The number of wheelers/disabled far outnumbers the number of known devs. Devs come from around the world, Australia, the United States, Argentina, England, Belgium, Canada etc. A dev who is lucky enough to find a match within the wheeler community, might then be stuck, because they live on the other side of the world, which all in all may be a breaking point. Not to mention, from what I have gathered - sure, devs, are attracted to wheelers/'disabled', but they also inherit a fear of seemingly violating a social more of displaying overt attraction to disability, which much of society can't understand quite yet.
...so, what's really happened, is the internet has moved things forward indeed...true, but what's really happened, is that it's made a devo-wheeler connection more 'plausible', not necessarily more 'possible'.
|
|
|
|
Post by matisse on May 24, 2007 13:37:29 GMT -5
You all are getting ahead of yourselves. The whole moving thing comes into the picture much later. Still a question mark for me. Maybe there is stuff going on behind the scenes. Or maybe the guys are just sitting back and not taking the first step(s)?
|
|
|
|
Post by Pony on May 24, 2007 17:15:32 GMT -5
Wow, this thread has struck some nerve endings, bringing Devs out of the shadows!! That's good, it's amazingly interesting when discussing the core of Devness. 1st, I want to say I think this shows the complexity of humans, each Dev has her own little twist on what brings her to be fascinated with chairdudes. It's no different than why people like anything. 2nd, I thought Cake hit on something interesting about being drawn to the pain, not just physical, but maybe the emotional pain of being in a chair. It made me remember something in my early days of getting hurt. I was in the hospital 7 months and a rehab for almost a year, and the worse off I was, the more girls were drawn to me. I remember a student nurse (mere weeks after my wreck) who could not leave me alone. She was actually irritating me coz i was in bad shape at that time, and I had zero energy for anything, and acted like we were getting close in relationship. Then there was a Respitory Therapist who started kissing me, then ran from the room. Then, there was two more nurses, and one of them was my first sexual experience after my wreck. I was thinkin, 'Christ, i never had this many girls on my feet!!' Now when I look back, I think my situation, or pain, touched them deeply, and so they were drawn to me. Also, Anais said something about the feeling of 'being needed' or making things better....I can understand this!! It's a euphoric feeling to pull somebody out of the darkness, to make them feel GOOD, save them. Hell, I've played this role in past girlfriend relationships, and I can tell you, it's a good feeling to be needed like that. The problem is it usually gets out of hand, constant SAVING somebody turns into hell, and I swore I'd never do that again. I'm a strong, well-adjusted personality, and if girls think I need SAVING, they soon figure out I don't, and I can feel their interest wane sometimes. Strange, huh? I think I do better with non-Dev girls. I can say this, the girls I've had in the past were NOT attracted because of chair. They felt extra drawn to me because they felt my situation very closely, but it was never the chair. As for 'Moving", I had a g/f from Delaware for 2 years, she flew to Fla twice a year, and we talked almost everyday...the sex was as intense over the phone as it was in person! She seriously considered moving, but she was a Legal Secretary to a powerful attorney, making huge $$ and her family was there, and so the distance killed it in the end, but we are still friends as she just wrote me an email. She now lives with an AB guy and his kids, and they have normal relationship, but we both remember how powerful those two years were. So, it can happen, and distance doesn't automatically destroy a relationship...there's airlines and hotels!! |
|
|
|
Post by Ouch on May 24, 2007 20:13:14 GMT -5
Reminds me of a few lines from a song:
"...You love somebody
Save their soul
Tie them to your Heaven
Erase their Hell
Love the lifestyle
If you feel it
Don't try to change them
You never will..."
|
|
|
|
Post by dolly on May 24, 2007 20:36:47 GMT -5
hmmm...nursing or saving a man holds no appeal to me whatsoever. i'm attracted to independent men. although actual physical independence may vary due to the level of disability, the ability to manage one's own life is imperative in order for me to be attracted to someone. of course i don't mind helping out when needed, but that's part of being in a relationship. there is certainly something sexy about a guy who has overcome an obstacle in life and who not only survives but thrives. but that would be applicable to any sort of adversity and it doesn't feel like an inherent aspect of my dev-type attraction. sure, devs, are attracted to wheelers/'disabled', but they also inherit a fear of seemingly violating a social more of displaying overt attraction to disability, which much of society can't understand quite yet. this is true. but i think the issue is not only societal mores but also the lack of understanding or acceptance of our attraction by the people with disabilities themselves. and matisse, there may be some devs here who are looking for "a wheeler", any wheeler. but for a lot of us there are other factors that are key for a relationship to take seed. it's something that may happen gradually, but it's not what we are here "for". |
|
|
|
Post by BA on May 25, 2007 13:18:36 GMT -5
I too, as I have said many times on this board, am attracted to independent, strong, self-assured (but not arrogant) men.
As dolly stated; nursing or "rescuing" a man from his pain, be it emotional or physical has no appeal for me. I could easily find an alcoholic or drug addict if I had that need (and, sadly, there are plenty of women who DO seem to have that need).
As for the question of my able-bodies friends, family or colleagues impacting my relationship choices.... the answer is mute. I'd give that absolutely NO consideration whatsoever.
|
|
).
