Has anyone heard of Susanne Eman?

[Chas]

I had not heard of her until this thread. Now I wish I hadn't.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

Deleted.

[Rayaan]

Actually the main reasons behind feederism are erotic. This is a fetish that she and many others get a kick out of it for whatever reasons sort of like bdsm.

I agree, and I was reading an article one day about the psychology of such an erotic fantasy (see the quotes below):

http://bitchmagazine.org/article/feast-of-burden

To publicly eat when you're already fat might be one of the most transgressive behaviors available to the modern woman. And though feeding pornography eroticizes the pain of overeating, it also emphasizes a certain possibility for female pleasure that is decidedly antagonistic to the heteronormative model - in other words, there's no penis necessary. (In his essay on porn in the book Fat: The Anthropology of an Obsession, anthropologist Don Kulick suggests that feeding pornography is a rejection of the penis as the "ultimate bestower of rapture.") Feeding pornography also reconfigures depictions of female pleasure when it offers obese bodies as visual "proof" of female sexual fulfillment: If eating is sexy, the body of a 400-pound woman itself is testament to her satisfaction—no stagy wailing or sheet-clutching required.

A "feeder" (usually male) encourages the "feedee" (usually female) to gain weight, often literally placing the food in her mouth. The ultimate (if generally unattained) goal of the relationship is for the feedee to become immobile, and this eventual incapacitation is fetishized: Feeders get off on the idea that their feedee might one day become too "satisfied" - and too obese - to move, thus making them completely dependent on their feeder. It's an extreme manifestation of the idea that masculinity in men involves eroticized dominance over women.

I think this sort of behavior is really unhealthy, though, and it is something physically self-abusive. I don't have much respect for these people to be honest.

But again, it's not my life, it's theirs.

[Tea Earl Grey Hot]

Actually the main reasons behind feederism are erotic. This is a fetish that she and many others get a kick out of it for whatever reasons sort of like bdsm.

I agree, and I was reading an article one day about the psychology of such an erotic fantasy (see the quotes below):

http://bitchmagazine.org/article/feast-of-burden

To publicly eat when you're already fat might be one of the most transgressive behaviors available to the modern woman. And though feeding pornography eroticizes the pain of overeating, it also emphasizes a certain possibility for female pleasure that is decidedly antagonistic to the heteronormative model - in other words, there's no penis necessary. (In his essay on porn in the book Fat: The Anthropology of an Obsession, anthropologist Don Kulick suggests that feeding pornography is a rejection of the penis as the "ultimate bestower of rapture.") Feeding pornography also reconfigures depictions of female pleasure when it offers obese bodies as visual "proof" of female sexual fulfillment: If eating is sexy, the body of a 400-pound woman itself is testament to her satisfaction—no stagy wailing or sheet-clutching required.

A "feeder" (usually male) encourages the "feedee" (usually female) to gain weight, often literally placing the food in her mouth. The ultimate (if generally unattained) goal of the relationship is for the feedee to become immobile, and this eventual incapacitation is fetishized: Feeders get off on the idea that their feedee might one day become too "satisfied" - and too obese - to move, thus making them completely dependent on their feeder. It's an extreme manifestation of the idea that masculinity in men involves eroticized dominance over women.

I think this sort of behavior is really unhealthy, though, and it is something physically self-abusive. I don't have much respect for these people to be honest.

But again, it's not my life, it's theirs.

Those are good summaries I suppose. There is of course much more variety in the real world than a single definition can encompass.

Not all feedees are interested in becoming immobile. Some fantasize about it but it's just fantasy. Many just put a limit like "I'm not going past 250lbs" etc.

Not all fat admirers (FA's) are interested in feederism. Many find it abhorrent.

Not all "fat acceptance" people are fat admirers and vice versa.

There are "stuffers": people who once in a while overeat to distend their abdomen. They're not necessarily interested being fat, they just get off looking pregnant and feeling full. Related to this are people into "inflation" who use air pumps. The two groups often overlap.

It seems that I am now a candidate for weirdest member! Oops.

[Rayaan]

Those are good summaries I suppose. There is of course much more variety in the real world than a single definition can encompass.

Yeah, there is more variety than a single definition, and oftentimes they may overlap in their interests.

But you said that the "main reasons behind feederism are erotic," and that is what the context was in my initial response. I understand that some people fantasize about it and for them it's just a fantasy, i.e. they don't act upon it, which I think is the right thing to do. It's only when people begin to externalize (or act upon) such a fantasy that it becomes repulsive and self-damaging, especially when it gets so extreme as in the case of Susanne Eman.

I also get the impression that people who have a fetish like this - and are so preoccupied with it (as is the subject in the OP) - give little meaning to their lives independent of their own bodies and that's why they resort to stuffing their mouths and bellies by succumbing to these kind of gluttonous, erotic-driven desires. So it's not a surprise why they get frowned upon.

[Aractus]

I heard somewhere that the world actually produces enough food so that everyone on the planet could get above the needed daily calorie intake for males. If that is indeed true then that makes people like this woman (morbidly obese) incredibly selfish people. I don't care if they've had a traumatic childhood, i don't care if its a defensive mechanism to cope with stress, if you get that big there is no reason to justify that at all.

Agreed it is selfish. She's putting herself well before her children (parents should put the interests of their children ahead of their own interests), not to mention being a burden on society (the taxpayer gets to foot the bill for medical expenses, etc?)

---

Somebody call Obama, I know how he can get a spy in north Korea.

---

Not strictly true in a state where one has state funded welfare, like the UK. The NHS is spending countless millions on treating complications as a result of obesity. The medical victim is the person making themselves obese. But financially we're all suffering as a result.

Yep. This guy cost the British taxpayer est. £100,000/year and over £1,000,000 in total. He's now lost a huge amount of weight and wants the State to remove the flabs of skin left over.

---

I fully support welfarism, especially because I benefit from it (Diabetic myself, type 1) and because without it we'd be more like the US which is split between haves and have nots.

...

My main gripe is that, in the vast majority of instances, obesity is self-inflicted. There are certainly many cases where it is not (genetics, perhaps depression from an uncontrollable event such as bereavement or something), but the ones that are are draining resources from other, arguably more important areas.

One of my friends is a GP and I asked him one time is it true that overweight/obesity is linked to type-2 diabetes? He said yes and that he wished that many of his patients would heed his advice and loose weight to combat their disease.

It is true that obesity can be the result of other things like certain medications or certain conditions, but that isn't too common.

---

That's the fault of the system then. You set it up to allow the treatment of preventable illness, don't be upset when people take advantage of it.

Um, wrong. Any public service that is provided by taxpayer money should be accountable and people shouldn't be allowed to "take advantage" of it like that...