Amputee Fetishes: 6 Realities Of Losing Both Legs As A Girl

Our thoughts about the famous Cracked.com.

Re: Amputee Fetishes ???... !!!

Postby DjiboutiDan » Wed Jul 01, 2015 7:12 pm

That was an interesting article, and I agree that those people saying she should have died are assholes. What she did was really, really stupid but it didn't deserve the death penalty.

But, against my better judgment, I just can't seem to let this go...
DamianaRaven wrote:Even if we were, I should hope that children would be a universal exception because they're kids and kids are expected to make idiotic decisions.

DamianaRaven wrote:I may or may not have called somebody a load their mother should have swallowed. Since wishing people out of existence is a power the Lord (quite wisely) decided not to bestow upon the likes of me, I guess I'll have to hold on to the faith that such people will ultimately get what they deserve.

Many of those commenters are probably idiot teenagers who think trolling is hilarious. Of course there's a fair amount of nuance here, and I'd say you still have the moral high ground. But come on, you can't get mad at people for wishing death upon someone and then wish death upon them.
  • 16

Carrie wrote:But I suspect Dan will figure it out, because Dan’s apparently magic.
User avatar
DjiboutiDan
TCS Regular
TCS Regular
 
Posts: 386
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 8:20 pm
Location: DC area
Show rep
Title: Bilge Rat

Re: Amputee Fetishes: 6 Realities Of Losing Both Legs As A G

Postby NotCIAAgent » Wed Jul 01, 2015 7:29 pm

We can't go around punishing people for being stupid, can we? If we would, nobody would live past adolescence.

Tesseracts wrote:I don't like the aversion people have to fetishists. If I lost my limbs I'd be glad to find somebody who is turned on specifically by missing limbs. I would be providing them with something they really really want but can't easily find, and that puts me in a much better position in the relationship. Relationships are all about controlling people, so this is pretty much ideal.

The only issue is if the fetishist regards the object of their fetish as nothing more than a source of fetish fulfillment. However, that is also a potential issue in any non fetish relationship. People without fetishes are perfectly capable of objectifying their partners. People with fetishes are capable of regarding partners as human.


The Internet taught me that having any kind of sexual attraction towards someone automatically equates to objectification and, therefore, is bad.

Luckily, I don't give a shit about what the Internet thinks, and I think being attracted to your partner's exterior is as important as being attracted to its interior, if you are to have a fulfilling relationship.

Not that I know anything about those...
  • 6

Image
User avatar
NotCIAAgent
Knight Writer
Knight Writer
 
Posts: 2914
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 3:33 am
Location: 90's, Canada Wilderness
Show rep
Title: Shitposter Extraordinaire

Re: Amputee Fetishes ???... !!!

Postby DamianaRaven » Wed Jul 01, 2015 7:39 pm

DjiboutiDan wrote:But come on, you can't get mad at people for wishing death upon someone and then wish death upon them.


You're a sharp one, Mr. Dan. I've done some soul-searching on that irony and decided to express pity rather than contempt for these characters. I think only a damaged, unhappy person would take pleasure in the torment of another - it's why I'm so often seen praying/hoping that people get what they deserve. Those hatemongering goobertwats don't deserve to die for their stupidity either.
  • 6

Every once in a while, declare peace. It confuses the hell out of your enemies. (76th Rule of Acquisition)
User avatar
DamianaRaven
TCS Junkie
TCS Junkie
 
Posts: 5978
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 3:37 am
Location: Yippee-ki-yay, motherfuckers!
Show rep
Title: Crazy Cunt

Re: Amputee Fetishes: 6 Realities Of Losing Both Legs As A G

Postby octoberpumpkin » Wed Jul 01, 2015 7:48 pm

I don't know where to find an army medic though
  • 12

User avatar
octoberpumpkin
Time Waster
Time Waster
 
Posts: 1968
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2015 7:24 pm
Show rep
Title: Pinkasaurus Rex

Re: Amputee Fetishes: 6 Realities Of Losing Both Legs As A G

Postby cmsellers » Wed Jul 01, 2015 7:54 pm

octoberpumpkin wrote:I don't know where to find an army medic though

In South Carolina?
Just go to Parris Island and borrow one from the Marines.
  • 4

User avatar
cmsellers
Back-End Admin
Back-End Admin
 
Posts: 9316
Joined: Sun Apr 14, 2013 7:20 pm
Location: Not *that* Bay Area
Show rep
Title: Broken Record Player

Re: Amputee Fetishes: 6 Realities Of Losing Both Legs As A G

Postby Gendry » Wed Jul 01, 2015 7:57 pm

cmsellers wrote:Just go to Parris Island and borrow one from the Marines.


hums
"As, long, as,
SIX WEEKS, on Parris Island,
We held the coastline; they held the highlands.........."

Dammit, cmsellers, Goodnight Saigon takes a week to get out of my head!
  • 4

"Sin, young man, is when you treat people like things. Including yourself. That's what sin is."
User avatar
Gendry
Jedi Knight
Jedi Knight
 
Posts: 312
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2015 6:26 am
Location: The Cold Northern Wastes
Show rep
Title: King of the Andals

Re: Amputee Fetishes ???... !!!

Postby Jack Road » Wed Jul 01, 2015 7:59 pm

CarrieVS wrote:A more obvious limit is that you need the same limb on the other side to be intact.


Image

I haven't had blonde hair in 18 years, but I was having a blonde moment.
  • 14

Jack Road
TCS Guerilla
 
Posts: 3507
Joined: Sat Feb 15, 2014 8:38 pm
Show rep

Re: Amputee Fetishes: 6 Realities Of Losing Both Legs As A G

Postby octoberpumpkin » Wed Jul 01, 2015 8:00 pm

I dunno, I don't really trust South Carolinians
  • 4

User avatar
octoberpumpkin
Time Waster
Time Waster
 
Posts: 1968
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2015 7:24 pm
Show rep
Title: Pinkasaurus Rex

Re: Amputee Fetishes: 6 Realities Of Losing Both Legs As A G

Postby cmsellers » Wed Jul 01, 2015 8:13 pm

Gendry wrote:Dammit, cmsellers, Goodnight Saigon takes a week to get out of my head!

I assumed that would be a song from Miss Saigon. I just googled it, and it's a Billy Joel song.
I'm listening to it, and how do you get that stuck in your head?

It reminds me a bit of Steeleye Span's "Sails of Silver," but the latter is a much better song. Put that in your head and get stuck on it instead.

  • 1

User avatar
cmsellers
Back-End Admin
Back-End Admin
 
Posts: 9316
Joined: Sun Apr 14, 2013 7:20 pm
Location: Not *that* Bay Area
Show rep
Title: Broken Record Player

Re: Amputee Fetishes: 6 Realities Of Losing Both Legs As A G

Postby Deathclaw_Puncher » Thu Jul 02, 2015 7:04 am

There needs to be more fetishes based not on power, control, or the lack thereof, but on just staying on the sidelines, so to speak. Just Keeping calm and carrying on. No hacked off limbs, no castration stuff, no human furniture, no vore stuff, just going with the flow, you know for the sake of sanity. Won't someone please think about the sanity?
  • 3

Image
User avatar
Deathclaw_Puncher
Knight Writer
Knight Writer
 
Posts: 12452
Joined: Sun Apr 14, 2013 9:42 pm
Location: Fair Oaks, CA
Show rep
Title: Queen of the Furrets

Re: Amputee Fetishes: 6 Realities Of Losing Both Legs As A G

Postby PSTN » Thu Jul 02, 2015 7:13 am

Ericthebearjew wrote:There needs to be more fetishes based [...] on just staying on the sidelines, so to speak.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyeurism

Way ahead of you, buddy.
  • 15

User avatar
PSTN
Time Waster
Time Waster
 
Posts: 1422
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2015 1:24 am
Show rep
Title: II

Re: Amputee Fetishes: 6 Realities Of Losing Both Legs As A G

Postby cmsellers » Thu Jul 02, 2015 7:24 am

Ericthebearjew wrote:There needs to be more fetishes based not on power, control, or the lack thereof, but on just staying on the sidelines, so to speak. Just Keeping calm and carrying on. No hacked off limbs, no castration stuff, no human furniture, no vore stuff, just going with the flow, you know for the sake of sanity. Won't someone please think about the sanity?

Look Eric, I'm sorry I propositioned you with my bear-baiting fantasy, and fine, condemn me for that.
But don't take it out on my poor innocent fetishes. They had nothing to do with it. (Well, except the bear-baiting fetish, of course.)
Just kidding. I don't have an amputee fetish.
  • 2

User avatar
cmsellers
Back-End Admin
Back-End Admin
 
Posts: 9316
Joined: Sun Apr 14, 2013 7:20 pm
Location: Not *that* Bay Area
Show rep
Title: Broken Record Player

Re: Amputee Fetishes: 6 Realities Of Losing Both Legs As A G

Postby Dr. Ambiguous » Thu Jul 02, 2015 8:18 am

Ericthebearjew wrote:There needs to be more fetishes based not on power, control, or the lack thereof, but on just staying on the sidelines, so to speak. Just Keeping calm and carrying on. No hacked off limbs, no castration stuff, no human furniture, no vore stuff, just going with the flow, you know for the sake of sanity. Won't someone please think about the sanity?

There's a lot. Fetishes for certain body parts (legs, breasts, etc), certain clothing (boots, bras, stockings, etc), objects (balloons), activities (cross-dressing, spanking, erotic lactation, tickling, etc), and just a fuckton more. Take a look at the bottom of this wikipedia page for sexual fetishism. Notice how many things are on there. Notice that those categories have subsets (underwear fetish would include bras, panties, hoisery, etc). And I don't think this is an exhaustive list by any means. Can't say for certain, but I'm guessing that not only are there a great deal more fetishes based on things other than power and control, and that they are more common. But aside from that, so long as it's consenting adults, who cares if their fetishes are all about power and control? So what if some people are super into BDSM or whatever? If it's consenting adults, it doesn't matter.
  • 12

<@Tesseracts> your stalking skills make you the #1 counter-stalker

Not sure how to use the forum? Read the TCS Forum Guide
User avatar
Dr. Ambiguous
TCS Admin
TCS Admin
 
Posts: 2560
Joined: Thu May 02, 2013 8:38 pm
Show rep
Title: Random Pointless Rule Nazi

Re: Amputee Fetishes ???... !!!

Postby Tesseracts » Thu Jul 02, 2015 9:05 pm

DamianaRaven wrote:
Tesseracts wrote:People with fetishes are capable of regarding partners as human.


I'm sorry I overlooked this part of your post, or I'd have agreed with it. It wasn't my intention to suggest that all fetishes are insatiable hornmonsters incapable of love and emotional intimacy. It is, however, my observation as an expert in human perversions, that a fetish - particularly one of an uncommon and specific nature like limb amputation - can throw a hell of a monkey wrench in someone's sociosexual life.

A fetish is not the same thing as a kink. Fetishes are rather obsessive by nature so instead of merely being turned on by amputees, a true fetishist cannot achieve arousal, much less a climax, without the stimulation or fantasy somehow involving a missing limb. Would you honestly want to date a man like that? Frankly, I would not, even if I'd lost a limb. There are a shitload of men out there who would be into me because I don't have any teeth - I wouldn't really want to be with someone who was fixated on just that. Fellatio is more of a courtesy than a pleasure for me, y'know? It's not really a "comfort" to know that there are men who would still fuck me if I were damaged in some specific fashion. I already know that so long as I have a (mostly) intact vagina somewhere on my body, there'll always be a fella willing to fuck it for me. I guess it's a good thing, but there are some creepy implications all over that reality.

Yeah, I would date somebody like that, if I was also compatible with them personality wise. I don't think people like that are morally bad, so I wouldn't rule them out unless their fetish was revolting or inconvenient in some way. Practically speaking I don't imagine arousal from amputation is significantly different from being aroused by genitalia.
  • 10

User avatar
Tesseracts
Big Brother
Big Brother
 
Posts: 9653
Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2013 5:31 am
Show rep
Title: Social Media Expert

Re: Amputee Fetishes ???... !!!

Postby Dr. Ambiguous » Fri Jul 03, 2015 11:03 am

DamianaRaven wrote:
Tesseracts wrote:People with fetishes are capable of regarding partners as human.


I'm sorry I overlooked this part of your post, or I'd have agreed with it. It wasn't my intention to suggest that all fetishes are insatiable hornmonsters incapable of love and emotional intimacy. It is, however, my observation as an expert in human perversions, that a fetish - particularly one of an uncommon and specific nature like limb amputation - can throw a hell of a monkey wrench in someone's sociosexual life.

A fetish is not the same thing as a kink. Fetishes are rather obsessive by nature so instead of merely being turned on by amputees, a true fetishist cannot achieve arousal, much less a climax, without the stimulation or fantasy somehow involving a missing limb. Would you honestly want to date a man like that? Frankly, I would not, even if I'd lost a limb. There are a shitload of men out there who would be into me because I don't have any teeth - I wouldn't really want to be with someone who was fixated on just that. Fellatio is more of a courtesy than a pleasure for me, y'know? It's not really a "comfort" to know that there are men who would still fuck me if I were damaged in some specific fashion. I already know that so long as I have a (mostly) intact vagina somewhere on my body, there'll always be a fella willing to fuck it for me. I guess it's a good thing, but there are some creepy implications all over that reality.

Alright, so I missed this one the first time through this thread, So for starters, I don't think you're using all these words correctly. Granted, I'm not able to find super great, solid definitions for them. So let's start with that wiki page on sex fetishes I linked in my last past.

Wikipedia wrote:Sexual fetishism or erotic fetishism is a sexual focus on a nonliving object or nongenital body part.[1] The object of interest is called the fetish; the person who has a fetish for that object is a fetishist.[2] A sexual fetish may be regarded as a non-pathological aid to sexual excitement, or as a mental disorder if it causes significant psychosocial distress for the person or has detrimental effects on important areas of their life.[1][3] Sexual arousal from a particular body part can be further classified as partialism.[4]

While medical definitions restrict the term sexual fetishism to objects or body parts,[1] fetish can also refer to sexual interest in specific activities in common discourse.[5]

...
In common parlance, the word fetish is used to refer to any sexually arousing stimuli, not all of which meet the medical criteria for fetishism.[5] This broader usage of fetish covers parts or features of the body (including obesity and body modifications), objects, situations and activities (such as smoking or BDSM).[5] Paraphilias such as urophilia, necrophilia and coprophilia have been described as fetishes.[6]

So first off, we should note that the word fetish is used differently in a medical context than it often is in common usage. I think this is important to note because I'm not sure that everyone in this thread is using it the same way. The other important thing to note here, and Tess already pointed this out, is that a fetish is not necessarily problematic. However, I'll touch on that more after another wiki quote.

Wikipedia wrote:Originally, most medical sources defined fetishism as a sexual interest in non-living objects, body parts or secretions. The publication of the DSM-III in 1980 changed that by excluding arousal from body parts in its diagnostic criteria for fetishism. In 1987, a revised edition of the DSM-III (DSM-III-R) introduced a new diagnosis for body part arousal, called partialism. The DSM-IV retained this distinction.[6] Martin Kafka argued that partialism should be merged into fetishism because of overlap between the two conditions,[6] and the DSM-5 subsequently did so in 2013.[1] The ICD-10 definition is still limited to non-living objects.[3]

I just want to make another quick point here about how I wasn't able to find a super solid definition of fetish. Not that what I found isn't useful, because it is, but it is good to note that the DSM and ICD have different definitions of fetishes. Since partialism was mentioned, I'll bring that back up again in a moment.

Wikipedia wrote:The ICD-10 defines fetishism as a reliance on non-living objects for sexual arousal and satisfaction. It is only considered a disorder when fetishistic activities are the foremost source of sexual satisfaction, and become so compelling or unacceptable as to cause distress or interfere with normal sexual intercourse.[3] The ICD's research guidelines require that the preference persists for at least six months, and is markedly distressing or acted on.[26]

Under the DSM-5, fetishism is sexual arousal from nonliving objects or specific nongenital body parts, excluding clothes used for cross-dressing (as that falls under transvestic disorder) and sex toys that are designed for genital stimulation. In order to be diagnosed as fetishistic disorder, the arousal must persist for at least six months and causes significant psychosocial distress or impairment in important areas of their life. In the DSM-IV, sexual interest in body parts was distinguished from fetishism under the name partialism (diagnosed as Paraphilia NOS), but it was merged with fetishistic disorder for the DSM-5.[1]

The ReviseF65 project has campaigned for the ICD diagnosis to be abolished completely to avoid stigmatizing fetishists.[27] Sexologist Odd Reiersøl argues that distress associated with fetishism is often caused by shame, and that being subject to diagnosis only exacerbates that. He suggests that, in cases where the individual fails to control harmful behavior, they instead be diagnosed with a personality or impulse control disorder.[27]

So this is back to the point I wanted to bring up earlier, and that being that having a fetish in and of itself is not necessarily an issue, and it doesn't make any sense to paint fetishes as intrinsically problematic. Again, Tess mentioned this already, but you can treat a person pretty fucking shitty, both in terms of your sexual relationship and life in general, without having a fetish. On the flip side, someone can have one or more fetishes, even very strong fetishes, and still treat a person with dignity and respect. Just because a person appeals to one of your fetishes doesn't mean you can't always treat them as a person, the two aren't mutually exclusive. For people who's fetishes are, for whatever reason, problematic to their sexual relationships, or their life in other ways, or for whom their fetish causes significant psychological distress, that is classed as fetishistic disorder. That distinction may seem small, but I think it is a very important one, as it draws a very clear line between a fetish and a fetishistic disorder, and it's not based on the fetish being present, or what the fetish is (save for a small few such as pedophilia, rape, and zoophilia), but on how the fetish affects the person's life. Point being, a person can have a fetish and still have a healthy relationship with their partner.

Now, since i mentioned it real quick, let's just define partialism.

Wikipedia (NSFW) wrote:Partialism is sexual interest with an exclusive focus on a specific part of the body.[1][2][3] Partialism is categorized as a fetishistic disorder in the DSM-5 of the American Psychiatric Association if it is not focused on genitals and causes significant psychosocial distress for the person or has detrimental effects on important areas of their life. In the DSM-IV, it was considered a separate paraphilia (not otherwise specified), but was merged into fetishistic disorder by the DSM-5.[1] Individuals with partialism sometimes describe the anatomy of interest to them as having equal or greater erotic attraction for them as do the genitals.[4]

I'm going to set aside the part about if it's considered a separate entity from fetishistic disorder or not (though for the record, I agree with the current DSM classification of it as part of fetishistic disorder), since the main point here is once again the bolded part: It's not intrinsically a problem, and it's only an issue if it causes psychological distress or a negative effect on important areas of a person's life. This is the same point I was making about fetishes.

Now since the word kink was mentioned, let's define that one real quick.

Wikipedia wrote:In human sexuality, kinkiness or kinky (adjective), is a colloquial term used to describe unconventional sexual practices, concepts or fantasies. The term derives from the idea of a "bend" (cf. a "kink") in one's sexual behaviour, to contrast such behaviour with "straight" or "vanilla" sexual mores and proclivities. The term "kink" has been claimed by some who practice sexual fetishism as a term or synonym for their practices, indicating a range of sexual and sexualistic practices from playful to sexual objectification and certain paraphilias.

Kink sexual practices go beyond what are considered conventional sexual practices as a means of heightening the intimacy between sexual partners. Some draw a distinction between kink and fetishism, defining the former as enhancing partner intimacy, and the latter as replacing it.[1] Because of its relation to "normal" sexual boundaries, which themselves vary by time and place, the definition of what is and is not kink varies widely as well.

So you may notice that this article isn't exactly up to wiki's standards. Thing is, do a google and you won't find a great, solid definition of what is considered a kink. You'll note that (just like fetish), kink's definition varies a bit, though it's much more loosely defined.

Since I spent a good chunk of time talking about definitions (hopefully no-one lost sight of the main point of my post), I'll define how I tend to use these words, as best I can in agreement with what I can gather on their definitions.

Kink: A non-typical sexual practice. Anything other than vanilla sex.
Fetish: Sexual arousal from non-genital body parts, objects, acts, or situations.
Fetishistic Disorder: A fetish that causes psychological distress and/or negative effects in a person's life (especially, but not limited to, their sex life).

So you may notice that I use the word kink in a very broad context, and that any kind of fetish and fetishistic disorder both fall under them. A fetish is basically a turn on for a person, excluding genitals. A fetishistic disorder is only for when a person's fetish causes issues in their life, as there's nothing wrong with having or indulging in a fetish in and of themselves.

DamianaRaven wrote:A fetish is not the same thing as a kink. Fetishes are rather obsessive by nature so instead of merely being turned on by amputees, a true fetishist cannot achieve arousal, much less a climax, without the stimulation or fantasy somehow involving a missing limb.

Just in case it got lost in all that, this is the part I'm disagreeing with. It seems to me that you're defining a "true fetishist" as someone with a "fetishistic disorder." I'll grant that not all those terms are defined as well as I'd like, but I'm not seeing anything that agrees with this usage. Instead I'm seeing misuse of the word, and a maligning of fetishists.

And to be clear, while I find the idea of a person having a fetish for someone missing a limb pretty weird, and kinda creepy, I don't think it's necessarily a problem. I only consider it an issue if it: a). Meets the criteria for fetishistic disorder b). Causes the person to mistreat the amputee for whom they have a fetish (which arguably could fall under point A, but I felt was important enough to warrant a mention anyway).
  • 11

<@Tesseracts> your stalking skills make you the #1 counter-stalker

Not sure how to use the forum? Read the TCS Forum Guide
User avatar
Dr. Ambiguous
TCS Admin
TCS Admin
 
Posts: 2560
Joined: Thu May 02, 2013 8:38 pm
Show rep
Title: Random Pointless Rule Nazi

PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests