Jump to content

Where are the female fetishists?


Francoise1970
 Share

Recommended Posts

I have spoken with many persons on the internet about fur and I wonder why I never met a female fur fetishist. I consider myself to be fetishist and I think there must be more.

 

What do you think about this?

 

Loves,

Francoise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you think about this?

 

I think that true fetishism is primarily a male attribute. Since we all have some chemistry of both sexes, it is possible for a woman to have a fetish but rather unlikely.

 

I am defining fetishism as the unequivocal requirement of something to achieve sexual fultillment.

 

YMMV.

 

Patience

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe we have a member here with a huge number of posts who has mentioned that she is in this catagory, but she is not around as much lately. I do not want to put "Words in anyone's mouth" though. Hopefully she will come on with a post here.

W

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have converted my Girlfriend into a fur lover, she understands the

sensuality of it and why I have so many. Im trying now to get her

to join here, as she is quite well written and very openminded.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

. . . OK, John, you flushed me out! I don't have time for this post! But, as you know I find the topic to be a fascinating one. So, here goes:

 

 

I am always struck with the different reactions that our membership has to their love of fur. And, we have had lengthy discussions about it.

 

Because this discussion may be an issue of semantics I have copied three definitions below.

 

I have a very different "take" on words connected with "fetish." They seem to revolve around something that "shouldn't be", or, "not normal". I have mentioned in the past that many of our members here seem to feel shame and guilt with their love of fur. I feel it is connected with this negative "fetish" label.

 

To me, fur in sensual and sensuous. So both to me are normal sexual feelings. Therefore I do not believe that I have a fur fetish.

 

To me the love of fur and the natural pleasure that it can bring to sex is a gift from God. There is nothing abnormal about it. So, to me it is not a fetish. It is normal. As I define "fetish." If I carried this "love of fur" to not wanting my husband, then this natural love would have carried over into a fetish.

 

 

 

Fetish

 

An object that is believed to have magical or spiritual powers, especially such an object associated with animistic or shamanistic religious practices.

 

An object of unreasonably excessive attention or reverence: made a fetish of punctuality.

 

Something, such as a material object or a nonsexual part of the body, that arouses sexual desire and may become necessary for sexual gratification.

 

An abnormally obsessive preoccupation or attachment; a fixation.

 

 

 

Sensuous

 

Of, relating to, or derived from the senses.

 

Appealing to or gratifying the senses.

 

Readily affected through the senses.

 

Highly appreciative of the pleasures of sensation.

 

 

SYNONYMS sensuous, sensual, luxurious, voluptuous. These adjectives mean of, given to, or furnishing satisfaction of the senses. Sensuous usually applies to the senses involved in aesthetic enjoyment, as of art or music:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Francoise,

 

Linda's post clearly shows that are many interpretations of fur appreciation. But to read between the lines in your post I presume that by the term "female fur fetishist" you mean " a woman who is sexually turned on by furs as much as some guys are". I can assure you that such women do exist - I have met a few myself and heard of several others within the UK alone - however there are so many reasons why they might not make their presence known in forums such as this one.

 

Firstly furs are more acceptable for women to own and wear so many women may be sensually satisfied by their furs without feeling any sexual thrills and be able to freely wear and enjoy them publicly and privately without hassle or suspicion. Secondly, they may not be aware of such forums and may happily enjoy their furs alone or with partners without bothering to look online to find like-minded souls. Thirdly, fur loving women who visit websites like this are likely to be silent observers, happily reading the topics and themes of discussion and perhaps making discrete private contact with various members. Fourthly, any fur-loving woman who then decides to make public posts here to introduce herself or her passions is usually bombarded with posts (sometimes well-intentioned but too often creepy or disturbing) from guys desperate to meet such women and often this drives them to reduce their interaction or leave altogether.

 

Now I know that most of you guys would behave properly in your conduct towards female fur fans but I've seen many women members come and go over the years because of the obsessive communication of a handful of male fanatics and fantasists. Of course some women might relish the attention but few would.

 

My advice to any female forum visitor reading this post is to contact one of the female moderators here if they have any doubts or concerns about making posts here or in their dealings or communication with other forum members.

 

Regards,

Mr Mockle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a firm believer that there are as many women out there as men who either sensually enjoy wearing their furs as Linda noted or are true fetishists who would get a "thrill'(':oops:') from even seeing a fur in public or elsewhere. It also has been my experience that women also tend to be less public about their sexual desires than men. The prim and proper in public can of course be the complete opposite behind closed doors.

I once read a fur article in a Beverly Hills newspaper in which a woman described falling in love with her coat and wanting to sleep in it every night. I think she would've been very happy in this forum. That said I can understand why certain women would feel overwhelmed by the male response here . I referenced that fact some time ago when I posted here for the first time and compared my welcome to that of a womans. Apparently I stirred a liitle too much on that post.(':lol:')

So here's my two cents. I don't believe that women search out their desires as profoundly or directly as men. Whilst it may sound sexist I feel that most women would rather be led astray than lead someone astray. Therefore Francoise I would advise that, when given the opportunity, you take control of the fur seduction. To me that means being willing to be rejected by some with whom you share your desires but also yourself not settling for a relationship that doesn't meet those desires. Trust me you will find her if you honestly look and not expect her to find you. Especially here, where fur friends abound but female fur lovers seem very discreet indeed . Then, if your collection is anything like MS Love's, its just a matter of opening the closet door at the appropriate time(':lol:')

 

Ps For Proof of the female fur fetishists existence see my most recent uploads. Discreet yes but 100% fur lover in her own right. softest regards furomance

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow excellent posts linda and Mr mockle.

i for once am speechless. Temporarily. Just a few thoughts...

Excellent posts

 

All I can add is that female fetishism does exist.

As is rightly pointed out most women would think this normal.

 

I know many female smoking fetishists. In fact I have rarely been with one who is not. However they do not post much on forums unless it is between each other on women only forums.

 

Same probably with fur.

The vast majoroty of women like fur. Like smoking it is frowned upon so they mostly keep it to themselves.

 

Linda, miss T and Francoise etc. are brave.

 

If fetishism means that the fur itself is sexually attractive without a woman in it, and an attractive one at that, then I am not a fetishist either.

 

But like Linda I think it can be a spiritual fetishism; or as she says a gift from God.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trust me you will find her if you honestly look and not expect her to find you.

 

I am not looking for a female fur lover for a relation. I am happenly married with my husband.

I was wondering why I haven't met any female fur fetishists on the www.

 

 

Thank you all for your great answers and insight in this.

 

I think Linda is right: may be it is a matter of semantics.

 

For me fur is connected with sexual feelings. Of course this are normal sexual feelings (like Linda said), but the subject that leads to those feelings is a very special one.

When I wear fur, see fur, touch fur, talk about fur and even when I see furbearers and think about those beautifull pelts they will give us then I feel sexual exciting.

So I thought there must be more ladies like me.

 

Love,

Francoise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although I really like to wear Fur and receive great pleasure from it,the sensual kind TOO! I am careful not to make an idol out of it, I only truely worship one thing. It is dangerous to be too obsessed with anything other than God. I will not beat anyone over the head with my Faith anymore. Good Post ReFur!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the other side .. other hand?

 

Fur for men is NOT ... currently ... Normal, thus the compulsion to justify their/our feelings.

 

In so doing we will also look for women to help us confirm those inclinations. This aside from sharing Some guys get carried away with this..

 

It's a very envious situation for men toward women in this respect. Fully in line with Linda's observations.

 

 

OFF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The vast majority of people who have lived on this planet throughout history until the last two thousand years were animist.

 

They embraced fur, and all animals and plants, as part of the energy of "God" for want of a better word.

 

The crucifix is an animist symbol. every shamen uses the four points...from Yakut to Apache to Celt to Bantu.

What Christ died on was X shaped. That is historical fact yet it does not stop Christians placing much emphasis on the animist compass. So why shouldn't we accept the positive and beautiful and good energy of fur as a gift from your God....whoever he may be... and value it?

 

It has power the crucifix because it is organic and gathers the energy of the four . East West North South. THAT is why it wards off evil.

 

When primitive peoples encountered christian conquistadors making the sign of the cross...they said "fine. we get that. we do that. they must be good."

the whole concept in Christianity only comes from early priests using local religion and blending it.

 

The same with madonnas. Some of them are 4000 years old. Mother nature.

 

Now NONE of this should offend Christians.

The shamen of most cultures also spoke of a great white spirit that would be the son of the mother of earth in flesh.

 

Most animist peoples threfore accept Christ as that.

 

But let us not forget the goodness inherent in all natural things eh?

 

If you are repulsed by fur then you are evil in my book. It is a good test. shamen do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi everybody,

 

If I read all the things about fetish and furfetish I miss a few thing's. I am not sure but I thought that a fetish has it's real origin in someones youth. 4,5 6 years old. It is a subject that you see around that age that gives you butterflies in the tummy. And after that it never leaves your mind, but it grows and grows and you explore the subject more and more.

 

For the rest I think that men are more visual and women work more with their mind and fantasy. So that could explain why you see more male fetishists because of the visual aspect of the first impuls of the material. Normally you first see fur.

 

I also believe that there are a lot of man and women who like fur for everything it stands for. Warmth, softness, money, but that is the same way someone can like a car, but that is not a fetish. Also you will have people experimenting with all sorts of materials but that is also not a fetish. Anyway I just wanted to mention that almost all fetishes originate from youth and the real young years. And we all know where it originates from within ourselves.

 

On the other hand I might be completely wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is a "sexual" fetish...though you describe that very well indeed.

howver it does not explain WHY some peopel develop visual sexual fetishes.

Sometimes it can be accidental...hece the fetishists who want to do wicked things to warm pavements.

However it can be cultural; genetic.

So for example a cockroach can be aottracted to very hot ashes with little food and develop a craving for it. Hence they have become one of the planets most succesful animals.

Work is being done on this at the moment. Is fetish gentically necessary for survival and adaptation? Easy to see that with fur.....it is waht has given us dominanace of the planet so there must be some genetic desire to obtain it. The same as a craving for red meat, fruit etc. They make your mouth water. That is cultural/genetic but could also be programmed. Pavlov's dog therefore salivates at a ringing bell, and the pavement fetishsist becomes doomed to not pass on huis genes! In other words it can go wtong. I beleive PETAphiles are the ones who are perverted. It was...and is...evolutionarly necessary for us to desire fur. Also interesting that smoking is the fastest growing fetish and third generation smokers are less likely to get diseases.

 

Fetishism is any talking of any object and giving an importance/significance to it it should not logically (in terms of established science) have.

So icons, idols, are fetishes in many cases...it does not have to be sexual.

 

Agreed though on the visual thing in some respects; however women are becoming more visually stimulated. They are being sold it. We live in a society where we are constantly bombarded with visual stimulus and women will change. That potential was always there anyway. Females visual awareness has laways been valued, but they never had to go out and have adrenalin pumped by looking for game.

Now they do.

Most women respond to pictures of Johnny Depp or Robbie Williams don't they?

But yes their evolutionarly more acute tactile skills make them predisposed to being more sensual. But yes it does go deeper. There is a physiological need for men to pump blood at am immediate visual stimulus...or sex would never happen.

 

With fur, lingerie, the touch of silk, nylons, make up, and smoking however these are all sensual things, so women are going to have fetishes about them too....just a look through a glossy magazine tells you that her seratonin levels rise too...so they do respond to sensual and nice things in a visual manner too. Even stilletoe shoes, nice clothes etc the fetishism that a woman is about is surely that these things make her feel more feminine; think she is attractive, bring her into the mood. They attract a mate, get attention, make her feel better about herself.

But as I have said before...it doesn't mean they want to mate on the spot with any Tom Dick or Harry.

 

Tell me there aren't any women with a shoe fetish and you would be hounded out of most female company with laughter. Has nobody else noticed sex is better when a woman has a pair of incredible new shoes, even when they have disabled her for half the day!? The nature of it mat differ from men...but it is still fetishism an still a sexual fetishism

 

They just keep this stuff to themselves that is all.

 

Wear a dinner suit if you don't think women don't have visual fetishes.

 

They need biologically to have a powerful mate. He does not have to be good looking when they think he looks like he may be powerful....in terms of muscles, or being well dressed. But that can be visual can't it the same as looks?

 

If there was a woman only forum here that may attract more female members; I don't know. One thing though I feel the talk there would make us men blush.

Thing is if Linda suddenly came out and said,

"hey guys, I really; I mean really, like getting humped in furs" she would be inundated with loads of unwanted pm attention including from me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I myself would say I am a fetishist by nature... or is it just obsessiveness and compulsion? Anyhow, I am at peace with my needs and desires. I am very visually stimulated, and I agree that most women in the past were forced to quiet that draw because they had to be "good girls." Those days are gone though, today everything must be more intense for the people's tastes in order to compete, to keep interest going. It stands to reason that women will become more open with their sexuality in terms of fetishes more and more as time goes on. I've never had an issue speaking out about my sexuality, due in big part to my Mom encouraging us to be honest with ourselves and do what we feel is best.

 

I've talked to so many men over the years about sexuality, the drive for certain types of play or fetishes... it really does come down to early childhood, all our id/self-worth or realization issues are formulated between about 2 and 5 years old. I've had foot fetishists, for example, who loved to watch their Mother walking around in high heels all day from early childhood (they like to attribute this to being on floor level, height wise, and seeing the image of the shoe in the heel repeatedly). This fascination can grow and grow, becoming a firmly formulated fetish usually in the teen years. It is a story I've heard many times... the details of the fetish may be different, but the psychology behind the desire/behavior is very similar. I know that my taste for fur began around 5, although I didn't indulge in it until just a few years back... it was something that always caught my senses by storm... unavoidable. It is more intense now that I do indulge in fur... once again, pushing limits/boundaries/exposure driving the need for more and more.

 

Okay, so now I'm just rambling, but I wonder what the average woman in the 50's used to think about fur? I am sure the word fetish was never mentioned once, nor even pondered in silence. I am sure it was just a lovely, tactile garment that they had and loved or aimed to own one day. How the likes of peta have sullied something so natural is totally amazing to me! Centuries of tradition, cultural norms... all tossed aside like a dirty rag for fear of reprisal, guilt or whatnot from a big bully with an agenda. Mind boggling and truly fanatical fascism! I want a revolution, eyes to be opened forcibly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Intereting what you said about the 50's Miss T. I,ve often thought, when you see all those old Hollywood era pics of stars in absolutely stunning furs. What's really going on in their minds, and in the minds of the guys you see in the background or with their arms around them.

 

After the flash bulbs have stopped flashing, when they are back home, do they go upstairs and have a romp? - who knows. I really think People are all the same underneath, because the kind of issues we are talking about here are very much primal How much do the values of the era affect or change us? I suspect not much when it comes down to primal urges like attraction to people and things. The only thing that changes with the times is the cultural value of how open we are about things. And even this seems to go in historical cycles.

 

Re: visual stimulation. I think this is probably the main sense for all of us. After all you can see at a distance, but cant touch. It's sight that gives us our first impression of another person , even if most of what we are seeing is subconscious.

 

I'm certainly visual in the first instance. I prefer the lights on definately for that reason, whereas my wife prefers the lights off if you know what I mean. How universal is this for guys? I don't know, maybe worth a poll. The sight of my wife wearing fur is definately exciting, touching comes later. But it's not just the sight of the fur, but the whole piture, her facial epression, female shaped body etc etc .

 

More to say, but time has caught up - need to do some work

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 50's was my High School period and I can tell you we were all thinking what we are saying now. On a rare occasion, the guys anyway when one got up the nerve, but not to a girl. Don't know about girl to girl but I doubt it.

 

I think girls thought about it, some maybe a lot but you have to realize the 50's were a very psychologically repressive period in history. Folks kept a lot of important feelings to themselves.

 

 

OFF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was my point Off. - It doesn't matter how repressive society is, we still think the same underneath, and therefore when people get away from the public eye into private, they are then free to express those important feelings. What did people talk about to their closest, or get up to, behind closed doors. - we never really know.

 

Interesting that only 10 years later it all blew out into the open with the swinging sixties. Perhaps these inner primal feelings can never stay supressed for too long. So you were just too old to be a hippy Off? or did you catch it?

 

In passing, Off - The pictures you've just posted in the gallery. are they model shots? or is she a friend of yours? She looks so pretty with that high collar

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those are eBay pictures. A cute seller, yes?

 

My favorite is the one with her wearing the Persian Lamb. Gives new meaning to Grandma's fur?

 

Back to the 50's [almost said Future].

 

The problem with an overarching psychologically repressive atmosphere [remember Senator Joseph McCarthy?] is its huge impact to our private lives and the unwarranted guilt it spreads. A lot of that is still present today. Bush feeds on it. Fostered by the prevailing political establishment which continues to repress creative thought and personal freedoms. This is what groups like PeTA feed on.

 

I mentioned this in a recent post in a related discussion over the power of public guilt and shame. For this reason I couldn't wait to get out of high school. I had already tuned in. Shortly after that in college I turned on and dropped out [to quote Timothy Leary and not out of college]. Admiring James Dean, reading Ferlingetti and Kerouac, life had a very differnet meaning.

 

I had "joined" a new group of peers that felt 180 degrees from the greater society. Being "Beat" was an introduction to a new world, allowing the contradictory feelings and opinions we had to at least have some group meaning, even if it did run counter to the greater societies ideas of "right and wrong".

 

Many of our "Opinions" are now State and Federal Laws.

 

This still didn't mean complete personal freedom despite all our indiviual personal efforts. A few succeeded and some at great personal cost but most still had to live in the greater society day to day and the persistent toll these little corrosive "victories" of our political and society "leaders" have in our personal lives is pernicious.

 

These are the daily struggles we each have to make against the multitude of attacks on our personal lives as we attempt to free ourselves from these greater "evils".

 

To make headway against PeTA means yet bigger battles with the larger political arena that have to be won. The two feed on each other. Where would Bush be without the terrorists? A President with failed ecomnomic, environmental and domesic programs.

 

Making personal sense out of our lives personal and collectively as to feelings and other more immediate important daily issues around these loving, gender and sexual feelings is swamped in this din of larger disasters around us yet to stay truly alive we must constantly struggle to rise above these while doing what we can to conquer them, not have them conquer us.

 

 

OFF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think things are changing gradually. people are starting to do things that

rebel against having every aspect of theri lives dictated to by the state and media and moral guidelines of the establishment.

 

Keith Richards of the Rolling Stones smoked a cigarette on stage at their concert. There is to be a major investigation of this to establish if he broke the law. People, even non smokers, are going mad about it saying why are those resources not directed to catching criminals. In addition,

the government has asked the judiciary to not prosecute shoplifters!

Then there are the first people being charged with offences related to hunting with hounds.

 

The country is turned upside down and people have had enough. Wait until they hear about the govrnment looking into the banning of stilletoes in the workplace.

 

Wearing fur will become a symbol of resistance; indeed it already is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found your post really interesting, Off, but got me thinking right off topic, so have posted thoughts in the pub under "Freedom". Not sure if it's relevent to your post, but once I start thinking I never know where things might end up. (Hence, I don't often think.......at least that's what my wife keeps telling me!!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...