Hello everyone.

This is the Northwestern Human Sexuality Lab. I am posting on the behalf of J. Michael Bailey, a professor of psychology at Northwestern University.

We are researching the sexuality, identity, gender, and personality of those attracted to fat. We hope that a better understanding of this attraction will lead to greater acceptance and support among the community at large.

If interested, please participate in this anonymous survey:

https://northwestern.az1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_0pUcFyVGqGTDRY1

If you also have recommendations for places to advertise that would be really helpful.

Thank you!

Go fuck yourself.

>>11590 (OP)
You'd have better luck posting this on Feabie or Fantasyfeeder, this site isn't usually very friendly

Dude that was a loong survey..
Thought I'd quickly complete it during morning routine, but it was surprisingly long ;)

When can we expect results and what is this used for?

I'm really interested since there's not a lot of research on this..

>>11590 (OP)
Sure were a ton of questions about imagining oneself as another gender. There's regularly fantasize-yourself-as-a-fat-girl threads on 4chan's /trash/ board; if the thread is up, you might see if any of those people want to fill out the survey.

>>11598
that'd probably skew the results a lot, I think they're trying to get a more representative sample of general members of the fat kink community

I am curious how the fat/feedism fetish subculture intersects with transsexualism. There are so many different types of people in this culture (feeders, fat admirers, female fat admirers, gainers, encouragers, feedees, single gainers, people just gaining weight to satisfy their partner without having the kink themselves, etc.) that I don't think a broad "gaining weight to satisfy a fat kink is analogous to the transgender experience" take would be accurate - but there are parallels between them that can be drawn, and there really hasn't been enough research into the fat fetish. I worry this survey will come to a simplistic broad conclusion like a lot of others though.

Why do people gain weight? do they do it for themselves or to satisfy their partner? did they desire to become fat before meeting their partner or discovering the fat kink? How many people are gaining weight towards an ideal "other fat body" and how many just gain passively and enjoy the journey itself?

my thoughts on this are a bit of a junble so sorry if this post doesn't read well or make any sense lol

>>11590 (OP)
>https://northwestern.az1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_0pUcFyVGqGTDRY1
Is a free McDonald’s meal included?? lol

Filled the survey. I want to learn more about my own fetish.

Filled it out. I support more research in to understanding my fetish.

>>11628
god i love having third world internet

>>11629
You must be homosexual

I made it, I don't understand why the only question about personality except those gender ones is the autism one, there are way more 'personality disorders' than ASD, I think this survey can be useful for finding out if there's a strong link between queerness and FAism (lmao) but not much else.

I'm all for more proper research done on this fetish that has defined my life, but this clealry isn't meant to be as comprehensive as I hoped it would be before doing it. Clearly this is more to do with trans research and potentially linking it to fat admiration and related fetishes. The autism questions that popped up at the very end clinched that for me, since there's a great deal of research being done lately on links between trans identity and the autism spectrum.

Anyway, had to manually put in my actual sub/dom gluttony based fetish shit when I could, in between repeatedly saying I'm not attracted to men, cartoons, or animals.

>>11633

How so? I was under the impression that 99% of trans people as well as trans porno actresses were thin to physically fit and even potentially vain or at the very least extremely self-conscious about their physical appearance.

What you described seems at odds with reality.

Did my part.

I'm interested in seeing the results of this; any information is good information. I'm even more interested in the prevalence of fat preferences in the population at large, but haven't found any good sources for that yet.

>>11634
The study itself seems obviously geared towards l9oking at what connection trans identity or attraction to trans people has or doesn't have to fat attraction. It's not something I'm personally saying, it's what the study was geared toward based on the majority of the questions

>>11639

Assuming this is legit, which it appears to be, that's because J. Michael Bailey is one of the most prominent (and controversial) psychologists who studies trans people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Michael_Bailey#The_Man_Who_Would_Be_Queen

Kind of hilarious that he's trawling for research subjects on bbw-chan.

wtf is with the definition of "chubby women" being between 170 and 300 lbs. quite a range lol

>>11633
There are definitely links between fat fetishism and the autism spectrum too. Fetishism in general, but I think it’s particularly pronounced in fat fetishism relative to almost all other fetishes (large enough to be culturally relevant, i.e. not balloon popping or car fucking).

>>11650

>car fucking

I'm hoping that's a kink involving having sex in cars.

>>11652
you know that's a naïve hope anon

I'm disappointed in this survey, I was hoping it would ask about my kinks, preferences towards BBWs, how some kinks has relation to BBW, when I believe it started, and so on. Instead it was mostly asking about identity, the questions about gender dysphoria caught me off guard, after I reading >>11640 and >>11633 all I got to say is: well shit.

>>11640
I find it astonishing that this dude has been researching trans people for 20+ years and he still uses the term "She-male,"? What the fuck.

And it confuses me even more why he's asking so many questions about gender. I actually put down MtF so I know my answers are gonna be used in some way, but there is 0 connection between my gender identity and my fetish.

Thank you for all the responses and interest.

I should mention that there are questions that exist to rule out explanations and hypotheses.

So, many of the questions are not part of our hypotheses.

>>11596
The manuscript should be ready in approximately 8 months. Then the peer-review process takes some time as well. So, 1.5 years is a safe estimate.

>>11594
Thank you.

>>11633
There are no links between trans people and fat fetishism. Signed, a straight cis male

>>11680

We'll know that for sure after 1.5 years of peer review, I guess...

First off, thank you for studying us and asking us about ourselves in your research. This sexuality has been way understudied and what has been published is mostly weird speculative stuff that’s off the mark (especially around the idea that feeders are just predatory doms by another name)

I will say that the poll kind of awkwardly assumes the respondent is male. For example, as a cis female, it was weird answering questions about whether or not I ever imagine having a female body and body parts. Well…yes? LOL

I’m bi in that I’m fascinated by other fat women’s bodies, but it has more to do with wondering what it would be like to be even fatter, I’d that makes sense?

>>11680
They're posting this questionnaire on sites with high concentrations of tranny autists so I won't be surprised if they easily make a connection.

However saying that, I do believe that fat fetishism/admiration is more mainstream than people tend to realise and that there are plenty of normal people that love fat without considering many of the more extreme interests that this questionnaire seems to be investigating.

Felt weird filling this survey out aa someone who is kind of a normie and not into feederism shit.
Based survey though

>>11652
>not wanting to fuck his car

>Approximately how mobility impaired do you want your ideal sexual partner to be?
We talkin' reality or fantasy here?
IRL I want her reasonably healthy.
In a hypothetical matrix simulator where I control her weight sliders, I'd want to try face-engulfing mechanical-blindness levels of fat like in my favorite stories.

>>11652

Ka-chow

>>11808
Agreed. Big difference in our world “disabling amount of fat” and just “disabled”

One has tons of interest, the other has none in particular

Bump.

>>14214
No, no bump. Do not interact with the MSM or any affiliated institutions EVER.

There should not be a
"Northwestern Human Sexuality Lab" in the first place, especially one where the seal of the university literally quotes the Bible (in Greek).

Do not heed journalists, professors, literally any of these NPC leeches who are responsible for ruining the world. EVER.

>>14218
I suppose everybody is an NPC, except for you and i

wait, what if i’m an NPC? probably not though

do any of us of have consciousness?
I want to say that I do ( i think therfore i am)

>>14227
Anon, we are all NPCs.
Apart from Chris-chan.

can someone explain to this NPC exactly what sexual disgust is? is it anti-attractiveness?

>>11590 (OP)

next survey you should more clearly differentiate between fantasies and realities. not always clear whats being asked

>>11590 (OP)
How about you go back to R*ddit and ask them?

>>11590 (OP)
I've been curious about my own fat preference/fetishism for 40 years and have found found very few studies on it. (By comparison there are 1000s of pages on foot fetishism.) What I have seen generally misses the mark, based on my own desires and those of other FAs I've corresponded/chatted with. I hope this leads to some insight.

>>14242
I think this study is probably just going to focus on trans people and their relation to fetishes instead of the fetish itself. pretty disappointing tbh

>>14218
So agree, 1,000,000,000,000%

>>14218
bro wtf is MSM, and how does the fucking logo of a university make it any less of a valid institution?

>>14279
>MSM
As you know it: The Guardian, Daily Mail, BBC etc.

>logo
It was an ancillary symbol related to how people who work in academia and media are by and large parasites. Not all of course, but a whole lot of them especially those who "outreach" to communities. Exploitative nonsense, and they have very little to offer. It's a trap. This ain't a right wing point either, it's common sense - just ask your former colonies how they received offers from ostensible helping hands.


The tabloid articles spreading myths about us is enough, perhaps a blessing in disguise. What would we be like if this community hit the mainstream from sanitized PC articles about us? Maybe yes there will be more good women, but there will be also a huge flood of putrid waste carrying those little gems.

>>14280
take your meds anon