Check out my latest Kindle short, Gummy Bears!

Start small, right? From Wikipedia:

In the late 19th century, psychologists and psychiatrists started to categorize various paraphilias as they wanted a more descriptive system than the legal and religious constructs of sodomy[8] and perversion.[9] Before the introduction of the term paraphilia in the DSM-III (1980), the term sexual deviation was used to refer to paraphilias in the first two editions of the manual.[10]American Journal of Psychiatry[11] describes paraphilia as “recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors generally involving:

  1. Non-human objects
  2. The suffering or humiliation of oneself or one’s partner
  3. Children
  4. Non-consenting persons[12]

Up until 1973, sexual attraction to persons of the same sex was included in this list.[13]

The view of paraphilias as disorders is not universal. Some groups seeking greater understanding and acceptance of sexual diversity have lobbied for changes to the legal and medical status of unusual sexual interests and practices. Charles Allen Moser, a physician and advocate for sexual minorities, has argued that the diagnoses should be eliminated from diagnostic manuals.[14] Psychiatrist Glen Gabbard writes that despite efforts by Stekel and Money, “the term paraphilia remains pejorative in most circumstances.” [15]

In the current version of the DSM (DSM-IV-TR), a paraphilia is not diagnosable as a psychiatric disorder unless it causes distress to the individual or harm to others. The DSM-5 draft adds a terminology distinction between the two cases, stating that “paraphilias are not ipso facto psychiatric disorders”, and defining paraphilic disorder as “a paraphilia that causes distress or impairment to the individual or harm to others”.[16] This will make a clear distinction between a healthy person with a non-normative sexual behavior and a person with a psychopathological non-normative sexual behavior.


Fat Acceptance isn’t about imposing other people’s rules on your body. Whether you practice HAES (Health At Every Size) or not, your body is not evidence of some moral failing. If you are lazy and self-indulgent and whatever other word you can think of to horrify those hard-working Puritans, your body is STILL not evidence of some moral failing.

Your body is your body.



The Rotund’s* post "Second Verse, Same As the First; Fat Acceptance Is For Everyone" isn’t concerned with feederism at all, but it’s definitly worthy of note to show the range of opinions and ideals that make up fat acceptance.

*The blog’s tagline is “It’s like I’m professionally fat”, which makes me grin every time I read it.

Angry Fat Acceptance Blogger Teaches Me Something

For the longest time, I haven’t been able to figure out what to call “those who are into feederism” in the plural. On KinkOnTap, I suggested “feederism people”. Then, of course, there’s “feederism fetishists”. But not everyone thinks of themselves as a “fetishist” anymore, and shouldn’t we have a plural that’s a derviative of the name of the desire itself, like spankos, furries, and Catholics?

Yesderday an angry fat acceptance blogger used a term which, for some reason, I had never seen written out in two years of being on Fantasy Feeder. Finally, I had my word.

We are feederists.

"Doh! While researching fetishes (there’s this persistent but obviously mistaken belief, going back to Freud no less, that only men have fetishes) I discovered that, according to The Manual of International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-10 version 2005), something is technically a fetish if and only if it involves a fixation on or use of inanimate objects for sexual gratification. If one is instead attached to activities instead of inanimate objects then the technical vocabulary is “paraphilia.” I think most people have probably heard the term paraphlia. What I didn’t know was that when one is erotically fascinated by specific body parts like feet or hair it’s called “partialism.” Since most people’s sexual attachments to objects, activities, or body parts aren’t obsessive enough to count as “diseases and related health problems,” though, it’s fine to lump them all together or to mix or match them. Or you could just call it all “kink.” Or, as long as it really isn’t interferingly obsessive, since appreciation for sexual variation is actually pretty common you could do what I do and call it “normal.”"


"In contrast to earlier literature, surrealist texts can be seen as documents (they could almost be called ‘reports’). They are indissociable from the experiences that gave rise to them, and reconstitute the substance and almost palpable aura of those experiences. The value of surrealist writings as a form of testimony is apparent to anyone leafing through certain special copies, as a general rule intended by the author to be seen or owned by close friends, and in which various rare documents (manuscripts, letters, photographs, drawings) with a direct or indirect relationship with the book, are included. Such books are called in French ‘truffles’, or ‘truffled’.”

~ Vincent Gille in “Love of Books, Love Books”, Chapter Five of Surrealism: Desire Unbound.