cool beans, just restate what you've already said despite NO ONE asking you to do so, complain about having to restate it, ignore the comment you're replying to entirely, but look like you replied while also playing the victim card and offering no real solutions. Very mature. Really contributing to the community Munchies. /s

Any of your acolytes want to try their hand at expressing a real solution to the questions posed rather than just attacking pointlessly or playing for sympathy?

And for the record, as you well know, I absolutely care and have imagined, as best I can as a cis straight white male, what you've gone through, and I think the problems you bring up are real issues that need to be solved.

But the solution isn't to shut down anyone that posts something that isn't perfectly framed to sjw aesthetics. It MAY be to divide the forums and moderate them differently, but that's a difficult, problematic, ubiquitous, and expensive proposition.

So I will ask again, do you have any ideas to contribute on how to solve the issues of inclusion on BOTH sides of this equation? To have a forum where women and minorities and transpeople feel safe, and to simultaneously have a forum where everyone feels heard and free to express themselves without shame (within the boundaries, of course, of not intentionally directing abuse at specific site members or communities, using hate speech, etc.)?

I think what Hiccupx was saying is that if your default is hostility to anyone that doesn't fit your sensibilities, that will drive people from the site too.

I agree the site has a sex-ratio issue, but so do most dating sites and social forums. It's an internet issue and a human issue, not exclusively an FF issue.

Making a place that women feel safe is important, but driving away the core clientele for a business is also a mistake. It's got to be a balance.

Yes, the worst offenders need to be dealt with, flagged to mods. But going out of your way to be hostile to people posting general ideas and fantasies and questions isn't the answer either, I think, and I think you know that too, deep down inside, in spite of what your groupies parrot to you.

That post a couple months ago discussing what you'd like to see on a safe social forum was a great idea, but I have a different one for you: If you ran a site like this, on this internet, in this culture, with this species, how would you balance the safety of free expression with the safety of women? Would you suggest something like a split forum, one for shame-free expression, and one for a safer space in this genre and community? Would you be willing to moderate the latter? What are your thoughts? Because if you can find a better balance between those interests, I'm sure we'd all, non-sarcastically, appreciate hearing it.

The default is the same as photography in general, unusual angles, unusual poses, best catch attention. But there are a number of poses that heavier women can do that thinner women can't, and those also have especial appeal. Any pose that creates a roll or fold, any pose using or moving or squishing fat rolls, and poses designed to show off softness or shape, imo

lol, not everyone is, but there's a handful that stalk the forums for any content to sjw rage about, going completely over the top on trying to silence content that offends or annoys or triggers them. And you were an easy target here.

If you're going to post in the forums, write down their names and learn to ignore them. Spoken with a number of people now that intentionally avoid the forums for this reason. lol, it's like these people have no idea this is a fetish smut site for people expressing raw id, not their own private safe space. I've seen them rant and shame about how other people should avoid posting on a thread if it doesn't directly concern their own experiences, and then turn around and gang tirade like this. Irony and hypocrisy is lost on them, just ignore them.

And consider writing a story, sounds hot and kinky to me.

jesus that would make a good story here

I think... a mix of things. Part innate predisposition, certainly. Partly a number of positive and negative childhood experiences. Partly interests in related genres, like fertility or body contrast between men and women or the inherent eroticism of counterculture and irony and recursion. A number of experiences in adolescence, both interpersonal and private, social and online. And an absolutely huge number of aesthetic qualities.

I think FF would do well to copy your format, or just make your own site, very well structured.

Sit down and shaddup. Are you mentally deficient? You use a quote as evidence WITHOUT ACTUALLY READING THE QUOTE, and miss this quote "I didn't actually say thin wasn't attractive - I find it attractive" explaining it even more. If you're not gonna read the convo, don't show up pretending to be a knight in shining armor, you're don quixote pissed at shit that's not there and trying to get laid

Dude.

That's not what I said, that's not what I meant, and that's not what those videos say. I admitted multiple times to errors in phrasing in the op, and trust me, I AM sorry. But having watched those videos... I feel heard, I very much agree with them, and some of what was said in them was what I was actually trying to say. I literally saved them to my favorites playlist for discussing this topic, so I can note their phrasing if I ever find myself in a discussion like this again.

I feel like it is likely that I triggered you, and for that I am sorry as well, but I also feel like you likely didn't take in my clarifications and rephrasings in the subsequent posts, but just spoke from the original place of anger (I do understand it was my original post that put you there), over and over again.

I am actually on your side, I know this because I hear what you are saying and agree with the declarative and expository statements, just not the ad hominem and recriminations, the othering, victimization, and fury.

I'd like it if you'd at least try to think beyond the original rage, but I do understand if you are too triggered to do that, and I am sorry for taking away your choice there. If it's best for you to not respond, I understand that too. I hope someday you can forgive me for writing words that hurt you. (Again, I REALLY never meant them AT ALL the way yall took them. SERIOUSLY: not my thing, and again, I am sorry that the original phrasing made it sound that way.)

I appreciate you trying to communicate through all this. Thank you.

How about this one?

The Larger Side - A Rant on the Irony and Hypocrisy of Fetishizing Thinness while Tabooing Fat Admiration

(Note: This was pure opinion, and reactionary, with a goal halfway between conversation and being pointed.)

Being into fat women isn't a fetish.

Being into thin women is a fetish.

For millions of years, a fat female body has meant fertility, which, let's face it, is the core of sexuality every bit as much as fun is.

A thin female body, on the other hand, has no biological reason to be attractive (I am not trying to be offensive here, I am talking about the biological purpose of physical attraction): it doesn't as prominently display the nutrition necessary to make baby brains, it doesn't feel as good in bed, and, for most thin women, it also kind of sucks to inhabit... except, debatably, for the attention it gets from people that fetishize thinness.

And that's the crux of the problem: two of the most common reasons to strive to be thin are: one, for that, frankly, biologically-illogical attention, and then the only reason for that attention is a novel and deviant modern cultural norm based largely around just how difficult it is to be thin, thinness perhaps being even an unnatural state for many people; and two, to avoid the negative social attention heaped on anyone that doesn't laud the cult of thinness or has the audacity to actually show in public a body that is larger than borderline anorexic.

It's even become adopted by the medical community itself, despite the dearth of actual evidence. Does excessive visceral abdominal fat have a correlation with some diseases? Yes, yes it does, and that's probably one of the reasons the waist-to-hip ratio is also relevant to instinctual physical attraction to a woman's body.

But there's grosse fallacies imbedded in the medical fear of fat, most prominently: that most fat is not unhealthy; that exercise and healthy foods have far more impact on health than body weight does; and, OF INCREDIBLE IMPORTANCE, that the disease and damage (physical, psychological, social, etc.) caused to individuals and society over the last several decades of cultural bodysize dismorphia and the societal pursuit (read: fetishization) of excessive female thinness, despite it being neither natural nor healthy in many cases, is probably LITERALLY INCALCULABLE (but, certainly, absurdly, obscenely, disgustingly, despicably vast).