Zoomers, why are you like this? I have nothing against ChubbyChiquita in particular (doxing is bad and you shouldn't do it, especially to someone young and hot), but I don't understand the whole social dynamic of online "feeders" who pay for meals without having a real life relationship with their feedee.

I guess I can understand buying a model food if you get to watch them eat it on camera, like the next level up from buying a custom video. But that's just a porn transaction. How does a man become so deluded as to believe that the camgirl is his friend and he has a chance with her, when he's already spending money to "feed" her with no promise of a real-life meetup/relationship? What makes someone do it for free as a Discord janny in the hopes that some day the e-girl will promote him to boyfriend status?

(As mutualgainfag, I notice that this is even more true of BHM/FFA dynamics, where guys will gain weight to impress a "feeder" who's chatting with a dozen other guys and is never going to be their IRL girlfriend.)

Am I an out-of-touch old person for thinking kink stuff is something you should aim to do in real life with a partner or hookup, and that online relationships that don't translate to IRL intimacy aren't "real"? Is this how the battle of the sexes works for all Zoomers, and I only see it here because this is my fetish?

>>29038 (OP)

>>but I don't understand the whole social dynamic of online "feeders" who pay for meals without having a real life relationship with their feedee.

Imagine being so old and out of touch that you write a long ass rant over what other people are doing with their money. This is no different than guys being sugar daddies to camgirls. Or being in a porn stars fanclub.

>>29042
This is partly right. I imagine online feeding is probably even more sexually-charged than straight-up sugar daddying.

yeah i think this is a symptom of you being old. online dating has taken over as the main way of meeting people even for normies, so with a niche online community of mostly autists, of course we are going to try to form relationships online.

and fwiw, every irl feedist relationship i've ever been in or observed started by chatting w a feedist 1000+ miles away

I am firmly convinced that there are far more men who are into this kink than women.
Anyone with half a brain can see how this demographic situation leads to the kink becoming very intertwined with online sex work.
If you want to have a fat-kink relationship in real life, I think the best way to do it is to meet a fat woman (preferably one who lives nearby if you meet her online) and try to gently introduce her to it. In my experience, fat women are surprisingly amenable to the tenets of feederism (or FA-ism at the very least) if you present it to them correctly.

speaking as a feedee who loves online feedism cause of my social anxiety and middle of nowhere location, it's pretty irritating to have people in your inboxes all day asking fat chat questions, your weight, etc to turn themselves on with the answers when they have done nothing to turn you on. buying girls food turns them on, if they are a feedist. a lot of fans want to say they contributed to a hot gain. a lot of guys don't want to date or even fuck a fat girl in real life, but helping one gain on the internet is a turn on for them. there's a thousand reasons people feed online and most of them are not this deep

>>29060
>it's pretty irritating to have people in your inboxes all day... to turn themselves on with the answers when they have done nothing to turn you on.

Perfectly put. There's so much take and so little give with these interactions online and everyone gets indignant when they're not catered to from the get-go. So many feedees are putting themselves out there FOR FREE and you're just going to demand the world from them?

>>29062 No. Fuck that. If they did shit right then they would eventually get pussy. They don't get pussy so they become bitter fuck ups and spend their days on God's green Earth "shitting up threads" and literally ruining people's lives and stalking them through IP and internet traffic. They're stupid.

>>29055
Despite our flags, I have to agree on this one.

I don't think it's healthy to think that buying food for some chick online is going to start a relationship. A lot of women also just do it for the free food.

>>29060
Have you tried simply not being a whore and merely finding a loving bf with good morals and be his fat wife?

"Fat chat" is a cringe term btw

>>29077
>Have you tried simply not being a whore
........Whooooooa. You're cool and I feel like I can trust you. I too am manly man.

>>29080
I'm not particularly masculine, nor do I want to be. Yet you make pretty misogynist assumptions there that women can't have basic morality - also you assumed by gender...

There are literal millions of sex slaves around the world RIGHT NOW. Why add another name to the Litany of Suffering?

>>29073
I'd wager like probably 70% of feedees on the platforms you see them on wouldn't start a ldr with someone who didn't feed them online first and build trust that way, then meet in person for an actual relationship. Also it's not like you'd take a woman on a date to ask her questions and not offer to pay for half or all of it, so why is feedism so different just cause it's such a kink focused thing?

>>29077 nahh eating food for people I wanna make connections with til I find a feedist partner like a lot of people in this community do is more fun tbh

>>29081 Take it back!!!

>>29050
That's fair, but I'm not talking about a long distance relationships where the goal is to eventually meet in person, I'm talking about online-only "feeding" where there's no expectation that you'll ever meet or hook up with "your" feedee in real life. That's what I fundamentally don't get. Did these relationships start with you buying food/gifts and then evolve naturally into romance, or did you make clear from the start that you were looking for an actual relationship? Not trying to be obtuse here, as an oldfag who can remember a time when consumer internet didn't exist I'm genuinely curious about what this stuff means to the rising generation.

>>29060
Yeah, I understand how from a female feedee's perspective, putting up a paywall is a way to keep the riffraff out and get some free meals out of it. And I get the fact that outside of a few big cities, meeting someone who shares the kink, *and* is a potential good partner who you click with as a person, *and* who lives nearby or is willing to relocate, can be pretty rare. But like I said to >>29050, does any of this ever lead to real world encounters (romance or just a hookup), or is it all virtual?

>>29063
> They don't get pussy so they become bitter fuck ups and spend their days on God's green Earth "shitting up threads" and literally ruining people's lives and stalking them through IP and internet traffic. They're stupid.

The most meta comment ever posted on this site.

>>29091 And yet he probably got banned for that comment.
>They hated him for telling the people the truth.

>>29092 if everyone who acted like that was banned, this site would be more of a ghost town than it already is


>>29085
the goal doesnt have to be to eventually meet in person. i receive adequate gratification from nudes, sexting, and video chatting with the added perk of never having to leave the comfort of my home or experience social anxiety. and when someone seems nice in addition to all that cool horny stuff, thats when ill try to make something happen irl

>>29082
I wouldn't start an LDR with anyone, that's my point.
>it's not like you'd take a woman on a date to ask her questions and not offer to pay for half or all of it, so why is feedism so different just cause it's such a kink focused thing?
For me, the difference is the in-person element.
If I were to give money via the internet to a woman I've never met, sorry but I would just feel like a sucker. Other people can do it if they want to, but it's not for me.

>>29060
It’s sex work, they’re selling sexual interactions and it basically killed the community. Turning it into a honeypot for whores who aren’t that into it.
This is feabie women’s justification for doing sex work is always “my inbox is sooo full and it’s so annoying. Of course I’m using that to extort money from lonely SIMPs”.

>>29082
Haven’t seen many feedees find a quality man with that pay-to-play strategy.

>>29140 Yeah but it doesn't have to be that way. Things could be better.

I love all the zoomies misrepresenting what OP is saying to make their point. Everyone knows this shit sucks, it just got normalized for the younger gen somehow. It's not normal, and you're totally right, OP. It's just a way for these women to scam money out of men, and it's met with resistance any time calls these scammers out. Fuck outta here with buying meals for people you don't know. The legit feedees I've met that I have talked to for years have refused me buying them food several times over. That's how you know she's a real one. She doesn't even want your money. "Online feeding" is a total crap shoot and an excuse for women to exploit gullible and horny men. What I love is the scammers could easily get more money/free food if they had any forethought but theyd rather block or ghost people and run away with their 5 dollars. It makes no sense to me. They could be talking to a dude making 6 figures and kiss all that money goodbye because they'd rather scam somebody than make good on their word. The hoes are so dumb they don't even think of this possibility.

>>29038 (OP)
Battle of the sexes thing plays the biggest role. No idea how old you are but it is a rapidly changing game. These types of things are happening for other fetishes, for non-fetish-based SWs, for non-SWs (streamers etc.), hell, even women with basically no public presence (e.g. a couple hundred follower YouTube channel).

>>29055 is right on the money for the next biggest reason. Supply/demand curve here is probably more skewed than almost any other sexuality/fetish/kink. Part and parcel of how demanding it is. A foot guy rationally knows the girl isn't into it, but he doesn't give a fuck, he just needs to see pretty toes. A feeder sees a feedee who doesn't gain and the monkey brain illusion is ruined.

Finally FAs are more likely to be "outcasts" (intending the most neutral connotation possible). Autistic or shy sure, but also, from puberty, engaging with women in a completely different way than the vast majority of their peers. Hence look at how many FAs set off gaydar. This can cause more isolation and especially a more submissive attitude towards women, which makes what you describe more appealing to them than you or me.

Also, this part isn't that related, so feel free to ignore it, but it came to my mind while writing this and I think it's interesting. Completely hetero perspective here, it's different for the gays.

Feedism is uniquely placed right at this nebulous intersection of "real" and "fake". Some fetishes (e.g. BDSM and its many children [leather, DDLG, etc.], feet, bimboification) are "real". It's not unreasonable to expect to be able to find a woman who is into it or tolerates it and engage with it as a frequent part of your daily life. Others (e.g. vore, balloon popping, general cartoon shit) are "fake". They are masturbatory, and the people into them understand, internalize, and compartmentalize that, and don't expect it from their partners. Feedism is right in between. It is vastly unappealing and immoral to most women. But some are into it and it can happen in a relationship for you. But realistically, statistically, it almost surely won't. But maybe it will? And then take into account the many, many subshades of "into it" that we often overestimate and rationalize. My gf doesn't try to lose weight and likes her belly rubbed, but doesn't like her belly jiggled and won't go on the scale. My wife sometimes goes all in and lets me feed her in bed and does fat chat, but other times she wants to lose weight and that all goes away. And so on and so forth. The only other example at this intersection that I can think of is a (exclusive, no switch aspects) female-dominant male-submissive dynamic. Theoretically possible, but the ratio of who wants it is something like 70:1, and that's counting SWs. For most it will be a fantasy. And even that is more popular than feedism because there isn't the morality/modification aspect.

Anyway, it's a confusing place to be in sexually. So it's no wonder why bizarre things like this happen so much.

>>29171
I think your analysis is very accurate, especially what you said about female-dominant male-submissive relationships. This is a thought I have had for a long time but have been unable to articulate properly.
Despite what I said earlier about fat women being surprisingly receptive to aspects of this kink (and I stand by that), I also think the best that most of us can hope for (especially those of us who are hardcore feeders) is a woman who will tolerate it or perhaps pretend to be into it. And like you said, you can say that about a lot of kinks, not just fat-related stuff.
To put it another way, I think it is a lot easier to "convert" your partner (without coercing them or anything like that) than to try and find a partner who is already into this. But even so, you will probably never find a woman who is as into it as you are. It's just the way it is.

Personally I am not really into the domination/submission aspect of sex or relationships at all. Women tell me that I come across as submissive outside the bedroom but very dominant in bed. I don't know what that says about me. I do enjoy feederism, but it isn't the be-all-end-all for me. I consider myself more of an FA than anything.
Of the fat women I have dated, I find that their attitudes towards their bodies and this kink vary widely. Some examples:

My last serious girlfriend was extremely fat. She hated her body and hated being fetishised for it. Any kind of weight / kink talk was shut down very quickly. She didn't like me touching her fat at all. But on the other hand, she was vehemently opposed to losing weight and was definitely a glutton. I found this juxtaposition very frustrating.

My previous FWB was quite into it. She unintentionally gained a shitload during the pandemic and she loved being fat. She actually made a WG comp video of herself, if you can believe that. She was bisexual and was a big fan of a few models (notably BC Skylar, although she claimed not to know what BC was) and would send me pictures of them frequently. On the other hand, she was losing weight for health reasons. I don't have a problem with this in theory, but it bothered me for the following reason: She was constantly trying to goad me into sabotaging her diet so that she could pin the blame on me. Some of you might think that sounds fun. It wasn't.

My current FWB is not too happy about being fat, but (mercifully) she doesn't go on about it. She is surprisingly active and healthy for her size, but also pigs out occasionally. I haven't discussed any kink stuff with her whatsoever besides briefly telling her that I have a preference for big girls and leaving it at that. She tolerates me holding her belly while we spoon and biting her neck/shoulder fat while we fuck, but that's pretty much it.

>>29187
"My last serious girlfriend was extremely fat. She hated her body and hated being fetishised for it. Any kind of weight / kink talk was shut down very quickly. She didn't like me touching her fat at all. But on the other hand, she was vehemently opposed to losing weight and was definitely a glutton. I found this juxtaposition very frustrating."

When a fat women treats you like this, you gotta know youre a weird ugly SIMP shooting out of your league. Fat women want to be fetishized by men theyre attracted to.

>>29268

>When a fat women treats you like this, you gotta know youre a weird ugly SIMP shooting out of your league. Fat women want to be fetishized by men theyre attracted to.

I want to argue with this. I really do. But I can't. Most fatties I talk to don't really feel one way or another about their weight. They've probably been subjected to endless "concern" from family, over half I've talked to have been pushed to consider or have considered themselves to get bariatric surgery. They know they're fat and have been programmed to be a bit apologetic about it.

But if you're attractive? And they think you're attractive? The gates are open. You give them the green light to pig out in front of you and they WILL. They'll tell you when they made the mistake of going to the gym and how their hips hit the elliptical constantly. You can grope their fat tits and jiggle their belly and they'll ENJOY it. If you're not exactly their type (which I've learned is generally tall, muscular, bearded, & tattooed - three out of four ain't bad but tall is mandatory) then you're not getting full access.

>>29270
If she’s disgusted by your being into her body more than she’s disgusted by herself…it’s probably a you problem.
Get in shape, don’t be a weird desperate loser. Fat chicks will be happy to be fetishized, even more if you’ll date them in public.

>>29268
Yeah, maybe.
>>29270
>You give them the green light to pig out in front of you and they WILL
Not gonna respond to everything here, but this right here has never been a problem for me. Every fat woman I've dated (and there have been plenty) has been pretty comfortable about pigging out in front of me without me needing to give them "permission".