DocRick wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 12:37 am
I occasionally wander through the F/m and found EVERYTHING is violent against the m. So, they don't need to segregate.
You must not have seen much F/m to say something so spectacularly ignorant. Gentle F/m might be in the minority, but there is plenty of it and it coexists with violent F/m without stigma.
The "normal" SW section? I don't see anything that says normal.
There are two forum groups on this site, "Shrunken Women" and "Violent Shrunken Women." This is a perfect example of
marked categories. "Shrunken Women" is unmarked or normal, and "Violent Shrunken Women" is marked or divergent. One is the "default" and the other is the "special case." In the USA, white people are unmarked while others are "ethnic." When you segregate out variations but leave one unmarked category, it isn't equitable or respectful.
ANYONE who fantasizes about killing or maiming other human beings probably has issues with females, authority figures, or others.
You have no idea what you're talking about, so spare us the spooky tales from the Thin Blue Line and your projections of guilt onto the rest of us. Our fantasies don't define us, and your judgment is offensive.
EhnVee wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 2:58 am
A common thread here is people are lonely.
Please, speak for yourself. I haven't noticed that size fantasists are any more lonely than the average person.
If someone were conducting research, so that therapists had a better understanding about their client's kinks, would you still vehemently defend size fantasy as healthy beyond reasonable doubt?
Absolutely. Kinks don't all come from the same place, and I would be very wary of a therapist who assumed they could treat a patient based on one or more of their kinks.
From what you've been saying, Olo, it sounds like there's money on the line for you. Your stories and images would ideally be monetized, correct?
I sense conflict of interest here.
Nope, I've never tried to monetize any of my size content and I don't plan on ever doing so.