http://www.dimensionsmagazine.com/dimtext/Forum/Feeder-.html

Serious Questions About Feeders
by Mark Anderson
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----

Judging by the increasing amount of feeder related articles, features, and
fiction appearing in Dimensions, it seems that the magazine is moving
towards an implicit suggestion that FAs are all feeders or have some
interest in feeding. This notion makes me very uncomfortable and, although
I can only speak for myself, I have also heard from several others both FAs
and fat women who are equally distressed.

I believe that the majority of FAs (not all of whom subscribe to
Dimensions) are not feeders and many do not even regard it as a fantasy. My
heart goes out to new readers who have just received their first issue, and
are as shocked as I was when I first learned of feeders. While I am not
prepared to discount anyone's opinions or experiences, I must however
express my concern.
Also, I would like to address the statement that Gary Hunter makes in his
forum position "Feederphobia" that "Immobility, is not a goal, but a
tolerable byproduct of this passion." Tolerable? On whose part? I would
very much like to hear responses to that from super-sized women who are
approaching, or who already are, immobile. This is a major concern for
those I know who are super-sized, and the loss of personal physical freedom
is, in my view, a very serious issue and not something frivolous to be
given or taken away by anyone in pursuit of anothers erotic pleasure. And
the term "byproduct," used to describe a person's immobiltiy, is degrading
and compares a human being to something like an industrial process or
machine. These attitudes really disturb me.

I don't know if the statistics that accompanied the article were part of
the original copy, or were added later, but I think there are some issues
there that need to be looked at. First of all, the percentages for "agree"
and "strongly agree" in the results were merged. I'm not a stats expert,
but I'm sure in doing that they no longer reflects a true representation of
what the original results were. Secondly, the nature of the questions in
the "Turn Ons" section of the 1989 FA survey dealt exclusively with weight
related questions or food and eating. Is that all that turns FA's on? It
would seem to me that section was unfairly represented in the survey and
probably resulted in a false or higher number of responses in those areas.
And thirdly, a five year old survey can hardly be accurate for today. So,
maybe its time to do a new one.

Now, if one were to take the 1989 survey results, however flawed one might
think they are, and apply the same methodology of combining percentages of
results, you will notice the following. In the section on health issues,
53% of FAs expressed concern about the impact of fat on their partners
health and 85% supported weight loss for health reasons. But, in the
preferences section, 44% were not bothered by extreme or debilitating
fatness, and 67% wanted their current partner to be fatter. With regard to
the upper weight limit for a desired partner, 23.9% indicated 950+ lbs
(i.e. no upper limit) while none of the respondents had a current partner
of this weight or even close to it. In fact, the average lowest acceptable
weight indicated for a partner at 211 lbs was much closer to the average
actual weight of their current partner of 260 lbs. And then, finally, 47%
admitted that they would pick a fatter woman to date even if the thinner
woman had a better personality.

So, what does all this say? Are FAs really happy with their current
partners as they are? What are the most important qualities they look for
in a partner, and how much emphasis is put on how fat they are? Even when
in a relationship, do FAs still fantasize about being with someone fatter?
If so, why don't more FAs have a partner whose size accurately reflects
their real preference? Are FAs torn between what they fantasize about and
what they choose for themselves in reality?

And where does feeding fit into all this? Is the interest in weight gain
based on wanting a bigger partner? What is the balance between fantasy and
reality in the relationships of feeders and their partners? How is this
established, and how is it maintained so as not to dominate or control the
relationship? Does a feeder see a potential partner for who they are, or
what they could be? Is there not the danger that the feedee is simply
fitting into a pre-determined role as dictated by the fantasy of the
feeder? How many feeders hide their interest in feeding from their partners
until the relationship is established and then try and introduce it
gradually, and how many are open about it right from the start?

In addition, I think there are some other key questions which need to be
answered which are of great concern. How many of those who find themselves
as the feedee in a relationship are doing it only to please their partner?
How many of them, after being a feedee for however long, fear abandonment
if they don't continue to play that role? How many feeder/feedee couples,
ashamed of others knowing, withdraw into a "bubble" existence and as such
allow themselves to be isolated from friends and family, thus paving the
way for textbook co-dependency.

I do not doubt the existence and the importance of the feeding fantasy for
many FAs, but I have strong reservations on how that fantasy is acted upon
in real life. It seems to me that the number of would-be feeders are far
greater than the number of potential feedees, and as such I have a hard
time believing that a good deal of convincing and persuasion does not go on
in the attempt to make this fantasy a reality. In my estimation, the type
of "encouragement" offered by some feeders amounts to manipulation and
coercion in varying degrees. More often than not, this behavior will
probably go unchecked because it preys upon the fear and insecurities of
the potential feedee. The sad truth of what transpires in many instances
resembles operant psychological conditioning in a basic form: Love and
affection as a reward for weight gain. Once this formula is put into
action, the results can be devastating both emotionally and physically.

No doubt what I have described here is an extreme example, but I have heard
of this happening on more than one occasion. Furthermore, some pro-weight
gain fiction actively promotes deceit and deception as means to achieve an
eventual weight gain of gigantic proportions. But, this is fiction right?
And we all know the difference between fantasy and reality, or do we? Since
93% of all FA's who responded to the 1989 survey said they collect
fat-magazines, videos and other fat-related items, I wonder how much
influence this fiction has, and does it accurately reflect the mindset of a
feeder?

I also understand that not all feeder/feedee relationships are the same,
and it causes me to wonder about the definition of the terms "feeder" and
"feedee" and what these words really represent. They would seem to have a
different connotation depending on who you ask and that person's perception
of the issue. Perhaps we need to be more specific in our definitions so
that we understand what the meanings and intentions are behind the words.
Also, there certainly are those couples who are happy and content with a
mutual interest in the feeding aspect of their relationship which may or
may not be based on weight gain. And we must bear in mind that food and
eating have long been a part of our sensual being, and are often included
in erotic interludes between many couples and not just feeders and their
partners.

But when does this interest turn into an obsession, or controlling factor
in the feeder's life and what effect does that have on them and those who
become involved in intimate relationships with them? These are serious
questions, and cannot be brushed aside under the guise of personal freedom
or preference because they directly impact upon the physical and emotional
well being of another person. And the whole question of consentuality on
the part of the feedee comes into play here too. Is it really a choice of
one's own free will or are there other internal or subconscious factors
which come into play with regards to acceptance, self-esteem and maybe even
deep rooted personal issues which might be better dealt with in counseling
or therapy? I know that the feeding issue has always been something of a
controversy and an emotionally charged subject filled with shades of grey.
But, there are just too many unanswered questions about feeders and feeding
which need to be explored so that everyone can know the full and complete
truth. ß