Gotcha!

Munchies, thanks for trying to understand what i wrote, im sorry for not articulating things well enough myself! ;-;

Alright, let me take this bit by bit:



Yes! Actually i think i said it myself somewhere!



Thats correct!



Well, not really. Im not acussing her, im saying that, i think society at large has this implicit assumption of rape being worse than abuse. This is not being said explicitly, but the way many, but not all, people behave (for example, the way in which they decide how to argue) shows that they unconciously believe that.



Yeah. I Didn’t answer on that, but doing it now might help illustrate what i meant.

If by rape we mean sexual assault, then we shouldn't consider it as rape per se, because of two reasons. It lacks the assault element, in fact if its something done in decrecy, its antithetical to it being an assault. And partly because of the above, it lacks the consequences that rape trends to have. You dont run the risk of developing PTSD, or becoming pregnant, or even suffer inguries. Calling it rape means we necesarily give up on the precise meaning of the word that entails these important consequences. So we are undermining the awareness of the general public by doing that.




Thats correct!

For the last paragraph... I guess there is a language barrier for me. I dont know what this phrase means:

Can i point a few things out?

I've read carefully the post, but some things trouble me a bit. I hope by pointing out i will get responses that will clear things up.

If i understand correctly, from your last paragraph, the point in the end is how to keep people safe from abuse/people who are abusive. I dont think it matters too much if its in the context of the kink or not, because there are mental tools and methods that are helpful in recognizing abusive behavior regardless of context. They work the same both in and out of kinks. Which also means this should concern everyone who due to their role, identity, or place (among other things) can be subject to abuse in the context of interpersonal relationships, which is also by definition [i]the[i] vunerable group in this regard. Not just feedees and not just women / trans women. So, i think the focus on that is unecessarily limiting. This [i]should[i] be a conversation for more kinds of folks, and it wouldn't hurt the utility that feedees / women (&trans) can get out of it.

And yes, patriarchy exists which means it skews people so that men are more abusive and entitled than women (and in fact i think that patriarchy is why men tend towards being feeders), but thats not the only factor for what groups can be abusive! Narcissism is an other very strong one. And because anyone can be a narcissist and abuse others, anyone in any kind of interpersonal relationship can potentially be subject to that abuse!

Im a bit frustrated, because shouldn't that be blantantly obvious?

Having said that, im thinking that while you were writting your post, the idea of what the topic is in your mind, crystalized a lot (=from vague/burry it became clear) which means it gradually changed, so maybe thats why you wrote it like that?



The other thing i wanna point out has to do with how abuse and rape is percieved by people in general. Im not entierly sure about what i will say now. I dont have stronger evidence than my personal observations, but i also have nothing against this. This is potentially true, and if so, i think its importand to talk about that. But if anyone has evidence against this, i wanna hear it!

So, because of all the feminist strugles and the #MeToo movement, we (well... some of us at least) now have a significantly raised awareness about rape and how bad it is. This, as with every other kind of widespread awareness among a populus, in our current society, creates kind of 2 relevant groups of people, aside from the ones who remain ignorant. Those who actually [i]sufficiently[i] understand it, and can therefore use arguments for upholding it are the one group. The other one, is people who dont understand it sufficiently, and at the same time want to uphold it, which then forces them to hide behind morals because they dont have the arguments they need at hand. Statistically, most people fall into the second group (because of the differences between passive and active learning for example), which means that in general, people in our society tend to obscure their ignorance behind the blanket of morality. So, consequently, "rape" i think is like that. Its morally unacceptable. Which i agree with! I dont think that its something other than very bad. But, if im correct on this, because a lot of people uphold it as such with the blanket of morality, they fail to notice that things very relevant to rape, can also be quite destructive, for example abuse, which rape is basically a form of. And so, i think we tend a bit exessively to frame things as rape, and maybe that deteorates its utility because it makes it more vague and less clear, but thats not my point here. Im not trying to My point is that, i notice how a lot of people act as if abuse is somehow not as bad! And i think that's a bit hypocrytical to the expense of any productive conversation, which doesn't have room for people obscuring their ignorance behind morality.

I basically get the sense that people who try exessively to frame something as rape implicitly believe that, relative to rape, abuse is almost morally okay!

Exxesive here means that, in the context of arguments, those people will stick to the argument that "x" thing is rape, and with that will assert, only implicitly, that "x" thing is bad. And that is something that really frustrates me, not only because that means the assertion that "x" thing is bad is not being delivered *explicitly*, but it also gives an easy exit to rapists (who can argue "well.. Technically this was not a rape, so am i free to go?", usually towards a judge that is too eager to aknowledge that, only because the rapists is a "fellow male".


And those are my two points. What do you think? Are my points fair? Did i do a mistake?

Fair enough... I will try to retrieve that information but it might be difficult.

What are the details of streching one's stomach?

Like, how much can it strech in the long term? Does that have dangers? Etc.

Oooh yes! That plays out so well with all the dark things im into! Let me fantasize for a bit! 😂

I absolutely love the idea of a sugar momma feeder, especially if she is a death feeder! For starters she could afford to keep me into her house and actively discourage me from getting a job so that i will be financially dependent on her. Maybe she could also afford to stay with me almost all the time, so she can feed and fuck me litteraly 24/7.

But for me, the hottest thing about it, is that after she has made me severely addicted to all this, she will get to feed me to death as a reward of drowning me in so much pleasure!

However i do feel all that is not super relevant to sugar momma feeders, and the most relevant part, i think, would be the fact that... If *she* pays for food, and then offers it to me, i better eat it all! I wonder how well someone could abuse that to get me extremely full! 😄

*sight*

One thing you can do is make 1 or 2 huge sandwiches a day! Really big ones, like half a loaf of bread big!

I share this experience and i have very strong and mixed feelings on this. On one hand an addiction is dangerous, i know that. But on the other hand its so insanely hot! And then as the addiction grows stronger, its so hot to still give in fully and feed it even stronger that way.

But to go a step further, i think the reason we like that addiction is because we like the idea of completely unrestrained -reckless, even- hedonism.