Anyone feel that the scene is getting too commercialized?

[Spectre]

So let me start by saying by no means do I object to the fact that models sell their photos and videos; obviously if they choose to then that's fine and no one is under any obligation to give any content for free.

And as a further clarification I think think the response to what I am saying would be some form of restriction on new models of stigma against models. I don't think this is a problem with a "solution" I just wanted to put my thoughts out there.

So when I first started lurking and getting into feederism many years ago (eight years perhaps?) there were plenty of new posters who were either partners of feeders or just interested in the lifestyle. Of course many of these amateur feedees would start selling content after a few years or so if they got enough of a following here which is understandable. 

But I've started to notice that amateurs these days seem to be getting into modeling almost immediately as soon as they post and it seems like plenty of people who came here with the "my boyfriend got me into it/I always wanted to try it" did it with an interest in the money. Which is fine we all need money and jobs suck. I'm considering quitting mine because staring at a computer for 40 hours a week gives me migraines that prevent me from enjoying my life outside of my job. Of course what's more likely is that most of the people who post here who do that do have a geniune interest in feederism but why not get paid for what you are passionate about? Food does cost money and there are healthcare costs associated with feederism that need to be paid so I understand it. And the woman here are changing their bodies for the sexual gratification of people here and often these changes are permanent. We pretend that people can lose weight any time but realistically anyone who used to be a rail won't go back to being a rail after they've crossed a threshold of 50 pounds so it is a serious decision not to be made lightly

And I don't even really mind that part so much. I'm more noting that as a part of a broader phenomena that's leading into my point. It seems that more and more this community has become a way for people to start a side hustle and that "the community" has become more about an orbit of people who revolve around an economy of online feedees and the people willing to pay remotely for them than a dating scene.

And this is really most heavily felt on **. Of course curvage (at least this site I know there are a couple dating spin offs of curvage) was never a viable way to find a romantic partner. We all know that the dating'/personal section is dead. That's fine of course, some websites simply don't have the culture and infrastructure to fulfill that role

But it seems that almost everyone who is interested in being a feedee on ** has a cashapp or a paypal. If not in their bio then ready at hand if you message them. And there's nothing wrong with that in an indivdual level. People can try to make money the way they want to but with the shear amount of them I doubt anyone is making real money off of it. My issue with it is the fact that it really seems to be killing ** as a dating website. Almost everywhere on it it's hard to distinguish people genuinely looking for a date from people who just want to make money off of a side hustle.

Most recently I had been coresponding with someone who agreed to meet up on a date. We had to reschedule a few times as is inevitable with online dating but we finally agreed on a Saturday. She wanted to go clubbing into the night and that's not really my thing since I work 40 hours and go to grad school so I don't really want to be out of the house after 10 unless I really know you well but I was willing to compromise since that's what dating is all about. But the day of there was really bad rain and the governor declared a state of emergency so I texted her that I didnt feel safe driving and that we should reschedule. She seemed like she was a bit offended at it and I kinda understand that; but honestly I just chalk that up to the fact that I was supposed to be her ride since she didnt have a car and since she doesn't own a car and has a work schedule far different than mine (she's a service industry worker) I just don't think she understood how difficult it would have been to make the commute at night in the pouring rain, go clubing, and then presumably drive back home at 1 or 2 in the morning at the earliest (probably later since she wanted to start the date at 10) while I would have felt dead from both staying up way past my usual bed time and from clubbing. 

So I tell her I can't come and I text her that we could video chat the next day to make up for the lost date and she says fine. I thought that was the best I could do since in my experience of online dating I've used video chatting in lieu of a cancelled first date since its a nice way to say hi before you meet someone for you next date and its establishing that you havent blown someone off. The next day when I text her about what time would be best for a video chat she simply texts me her cashapp account. When I clarify that I just want to have a conversation in lieu of the date that was pushed off and that I'm not asking for anything lude nor am I setting up the expectations for anything other than just a conversation she doesn't respond.

and to clarify before I make my final point I dont think this makes her a bad person. I just think it makes her someone whose life priorities are vastly different than mine. It's just the issue seems to be that feedee/feeder dating scene seems to be attracting more and more people with these sorts of priorities and less and less people who are actually into you know, dating someone. Paying for food is fine. I'll even accept that in a feederist relationship the feeder should pay for the lion's share if not all the food involved in the relationship. But there's a difference between that very reasonable expectation and making some one pay you as a condition to inquire about a "date" (which to clarify she didn't do but plenty of people do). The people on ** are looking to make a career modeling, caming and maybe findoming or at the very least are looking for a sugar daddy.

Which of course there's nothing wrong with but honestly, until the culture changes or until there's a new dating site exclusively for dating which moderates itself so that its not just aspiring models (nothing wrong with those folks, I just want to you know, go on a date, is all) I think i've given up on trying to find a feedee through the scene for good.

[gta]

I feel it's not just this "scene", it's society in general. We have entered a "gig economy" society, and a lot of people have embraced the "$5 here, $5 there" culture of making and spending money. With such a low barrier to entry to set up a donation/pay system, why wouldn't someone try to make some money in a "market" where people are willing to pay? Just 10 years ago, who thought people would be making top 10%-er money by being a "social media celebrity" via YouTube, Twitch, etc?

I think communities like these didn't see this kind of "pay wall" situation simply because the tech didn't exist yet. Sure there was PayPal, but that isn't nearly as anonymous as some of these other services seem to be. Online business was seen as strictly a commercial venture, and one had to spend a considerable amount of time and effort in creating a commercial site. Now you can effectively send money to an email address or phone number, and have an entire commercial presence on "free" social media sites like Instagram and others I won't list here.

[Gusto]

I came into this fetish around the same time as you so I can relate to a lot of what you described. I feel like the whole problem would be resolved if there was a dating site exclusively for people looking for in person relationships, where the exchange of money isn't allowed (wishlists, paypal donations, etc.) It seems like that would be the only way to filter out the aspiring models/sex workers from women who are looking for an actual in person feeder. If I was tech savvy, I'd make a dating site like this myself but I'm pretty computer illiterate.

 

[Spectre]

Yea I definitely think the issue is in part with the structure of our specific form of capitalism. There's a real market for para-social relationships and vicariously enjoying friendships and romance through the spectacle of a content creator on the other end of a screen. Of course at the end of the day it's just a symptom of declining opportunities but I do feel that as relationships and social interaction become more and more commodified then  the social mores that governed our society will increasingly change to normalize the commodification of love, romance and friendship and as a result will push out or privatize the good old fashion idea of friendship and romance for its own sake and will deprive people of the ability to form meaningful relationship unless they fall within a certain income bracket

[Spectre]

2 minutes ago, Gusto said:

I came into this fetish around the same time as you so I can relate to a lot of what you described. I feel like the whole problem would be resolved if there was a dating site exclusively for people looking for in person relationships, where the exchange of money isn't allowed (wishlists, paypal donations, etc.) It seems like that would be the only way to filter out the aspiring models/sex workers from women who are looking for an actual in person feeder. If I was tech savvy, I'd make a dating site like this myself but I'm pretty computer illiterate.

 

yea that really is the only real solution I can see. Either that ore maybe the closest thing I can see as a halfway house solution is to offer a subscription tier (cheap though like 3 dollars a month) on ** which filters out models and donation seekers and perhaps offers them a share of the money as compensation for the loss in audience. (similar to how youtube red compensates content creators for adless videos by offering them a share of the youtube red pot)

[John Smith]

Your post is so insightful, so brilliant that I've delightfully read word by word your introspection about that phenomenon and about how it complicate any space for developping any intimal relationship for the people who thrives for this in these now-dating-BBW-cyberspaces-but-only-by-name websites. 

However:

On 1/29/2019 at 9:06 PM, Spectre said:

And the woman here are changing their bodies for the sexual gratification of people here and often these changes are permanent. We pretend that people can lose weight any time but realistically anyone who used to be a rail won't go back to being a rail after they've crossed a threshold of 50 pounds so it is a serious decision not to be made lightly

I have to disagree with that statement. 

[Spectre]

15 hours ago, John Smith said:

Your post is so insightful, so brilliant that I've delightfully read word by word your introspection about that phenomenon and about how it complicate any space for developping any intimal relationship for the people who thrives for this in these now-dating-BBW-cyberspaces-but-only-by-name websites. 

 However:

 I have to disagree with that statement. 

Glad you liked the post! 

 

Maybe I should have phrased that so its not as absolute but there's alot of recent research showing that the only really effective way to have long term weight loss is through surgery. HEre's an article. It's not the best article I could find on it since it doesn't offer much in terms of biological or psychological explanation of why weight loss fails and the statistics of weight loss failure (over 90% of people who lose weight gain it back or more in 5 years). But more or less our bodies are designed to radically reduce our metabolism when we start losing any weight and also are extremely efficient in processing calories and making sure we dont lose them. For example there was a study of african hunter-gather tribesmen who kill all their pray and do nothing but physical activity all day and they found that they burn as many calories per day as... the average office worker. This is because the human body is pretty good at conserving calories during downtimes between strenuous physical activity and the more physical activity you do the better your body is at preserving calories between activity. Not only that but working out is a very inefficient way to lose calories. Furthermore beyond your body's ability to reduce its metabolism radically when experiencing weight loss and its ability to make rest periods less calorie intensive you also have a semi-permanent "baseline" weight which your body will always tend to reset for when you lose weight and the interesting thing is that diets slow down metabolism for a long time....so its likely after a failed diet (which the diet will fail by the way, their are ivy league schools that have a greater chance of accepting you statistically than you have a chance of having long term success at a diet) because your body is resetting itself but your metabolism has slowed long term you'll most likely settle on a higher weight. Hence why people end up failing their diets and being fatter for it after they lost all that weight. Just look up the biggest loser and see how many of those people gained back at least half of the weight.

 

Anywhere here's the article though like i said this isn't really the best article about it

https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/obesity-research-confirms-long-term-weight-loss-almost-impossible-1.2663585

 

[Chevalier]

On 1/29/2019 at 9:06 PM, Spectre said:

Most recently I had been coresponding with someone who agreed to meet up on a date. We had to reschedule a few times as is inevitable with online dating but we finally agreed on a Saturday. She wanted to go clubbing into the night and that's not really my thing since I work 40 hours and go to grad school so I don't really want to be out of the house after 10 unless I really know you well but I was willing to compromise since that's what dating is all about. But the day of there was really bad rain and the governor declared a state of emergency so I texted her that I didnt feel safe driving and that we should reschedule. She seemed like she was a bit offended at it and I kinda understand that; but honestly I just chalk that up to the fact that I was supposed to be her ride since she didnt have a car and since she doesn't own a car and has a work schedule far different than mine (she's a service industry worker) I just don't think she understood how difficult it would have been to make the commute at night in the pouring rain, go clubing, and then presumably drive back home at 1 or 2 in the morning at the earliest (probably later since she wanted to start the date at 10) while I would have felt dead from both staying up way past my usual bed time and from clubbing. 

So I tell her I can't come and I text her that we could video chat the next day to make up for the lost date and she says fine. I thought that was the best I could do since in my experience of online dating I've used video chatting in lieu of a cancelled first date since its a nice way to say hi before you meet someone for you next date and its establishing that you havent blown someone off. The next day when I text her about what time would be best for a video chat she simply texts me her cashapp account. When I clarify that I just want to have a conversation in lieu of the date that was pushed off and that I'm not asking for anything lude nor am I setting up the expectations for anything other than just a conversation she doesn't respond.

and to clarify before I make my final point I dont think this makes her a bad person. I just think it makes her someone whose life priorities are vastly different than mine. It's just the issue seems to be that feedee/feeder dating scene seems to be attracting more and more people with these sorts of priorities and less and less people who are actually into you know, dating someone.

Filter just like dating and work on your pullout game. 

Dump whoever disappears after 4 days without a response, doesn't apply what custom outfits you bought (ie doesn't follow directions), and is disrespectful.  The fact stuff gets leaked means they should get less entitled, and more creative to listen to people who actually buy (If I 3 or 4 star something, definitely listen and make me feel like a prince so I go all the way for example).  I also tire of only being reminded about weight as well; it's just impersonal and one-dimensional (I'll jump ship to the 10-15% weight loss bandwagon, which I feel can be better if I get more interesting info rather than the stereotypical I'm fat/hideous).  I know I made a similar reply though I will add to this, that you can explore/adopt other fetishes (or lifestyles if you need a more PG pace) rather than rely on someone fat and slow who's always going to take her sweet time to do anything, and get lazier over time.

You also can't be someone's ATM and it helps to test slow withdrawals and see if you get understanding with stability, or an attitude.  Just remember the difference is that fantasy lets you set a controlled pace but you can't exceed your imagination, and reality has less control and more exploration.

[extra_m13]

i may have to agree about the sensation of it but i am not really sure... like, many things have changed in that last 10 years... many models have come and go and as always i think the number of real feeders who are really into gaining and that at the same time are willing to share all the journey with us and some of the creepers will be really low. and, in between there will continue to appear ladies a bit lost, trying to have some fun, experimenting and delighting us with some gain and curves, i think it may be the nature of the feeder spectrum, for us it is easier i think, just encouraging them , for them, changing their lives and their bodies forever it is really a more complex road 

[John Smith]

On 1/31/2019 at 5:42 PM, Spectre said:

Glad you liked the post! 

 

Maybe I should have phrased that so its not as absolute but there's alot of recent research showing that the only really effective way to have long term weight loss is through surgery. HEre's an article. It's not the best article I could find on it since it doesn't offer much in terms of biological or psychological explanation of why weight loss fails and the statistics of weight loss failure (over 90% of people who lose weight gain it back or more in 5 years). But more or less our bodies are designed to radically reduce our metabolism when we start losing any weight and also are extremely efficient in processing calories and making sure we dont lose them. For example there was a study of african hunter-gather tribesmen who kill all their pray and do nothing but physical activity all day and they found that they burn as many calories per day as... the average office worker. This is because the human body is pretty good at conserving calories during downtimes between strenuous physical activity and the more physical activity you do the better your body is at preserving calories between activity. Not only that but working out is a very inefficient way to lose calories. Furthermore beyond your body's ability to reduce its metabolism radically when experiencing weight loss and its ability to make rest periods less calorie intensive you also have a semi-permanent "baseline" weight which your body will always tend to reset for when you lose weight and the interesting thing is that diets slow down metabolism for a long time....so its likely after a failed diet (which the diet will fail by the way, their are ivy league schools that have a greater chance of accepting you statistically than you have a chance of having long term success at a diet) because your body is resetting itself but your metabolism has slowed long term you'll most likely settle on a higher weight. Hence why people end up failing their diets and being fatter for it after they lost all that weight. Just look up the biggest loser and see how many of those people gained back at least half of the weight.

 

Anywhere here's the article though like i said this isn't really the best article about it

https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/obesity-research-confirms-long-term-weight-loss-almost-impossible-1.2663585

 

I have seen so many people who get through surgery who have shortly pass through a rebound and an handful of other peiple losing 50 or more pounds then retain their slighter frame thereafter.

Even if I consider this study as credible (yet spite the use of the taxonym "tribe") , there hasn't necessarily an absolute reality either.

[Guest Grumbar11]

On 2/1/2019 at 8:08 PM, John Smith said:

I have seen so many people who get through surgery who have shortly pass through a rebound and an handful of other peiple losing 50 or more pounds then retain their slighter frame thereafter.

Even if I consider this study as credible (yet spite the use of the taxonym "tribe") , there hasn't necessarily an absolute reality either.

I think the implication is that losing weight after a 50+ pound gain leaves it's mark on you. Once you've been heavier you'll never be the same again. Hormonally, mentally, physically. Like a car accident, pregnancy, falling in love, falling out of love, every experience changes you and leaves a mark. Beinging heavier does that. Stretchmarks, saggy skin, scars, surgery, all that and more changes when going up then back down. Plenty of people lose weight and keep it off, but look at them nude before and after and tell me there is no change...I think that's impossible.

[gta]

On 2/4/2019 at 9:41 PM, Grumbar11 said:

I think the implication is that losing weight after a 50+ pound gain leaves it's mark on you. Once you've been heavier you'll never be the same again. Hormonally, mentally, physically. Like a car accident, pregnancy, falling in love, falling out of love, every experience changes you and leaves a mark. Beinging heavier does that. Stretchmarks, saggy skin, scars, surgery, all that and more changes when going up then back down. Plenty of people lose weight and keep it off, but look at them nude before and after and tell me there is no change...I think that's impossible.

Counterpoint evidence - Reiinapop.

Height of her stuffing/weightgain, March 2018:

Picture from around December 2018:

 

I am not criticizing her by any means - I think she's attractive at any size to be honest. But I really struggle to find any sign in the second photo that would indicate she was ever as big as she was in the first photo.

 

 

[Guest Grumbar11]

2 hours ago, gta said:

Counterpoint evidence - Reiinapop.

Height of her stuffing/weightgain, March 2018:

Picture from around December 2018:

 

I am not criticizing her by any means - I think she's attractive at any size to be honest. But I really struggle to find any sign in the second photo that would indicate she was ever as big as she was in the first photo.

 

 

Not saying she's not attractive, she just doesn't look the same. Her stomach has stretch marks now, she has a different shape about her. Some of her soft curves she had originally are more angular because she lost weight in different places at different rates. It is clear to see if you've seen it before, or seen her before. Evidence in those two pictures is as clear as day that she was once heavier.

[Chevalier]

So many updates to buy, I'm taking a break unless I'm personally invested with messages who are thanking me and telling me about this, so I can really write engaging reviews that are like love letters while feeling fully rested.  So yeah it's definitely commercialized here.