Why People Have Foot Fetishes

[gamsky]

Here is a link to an article trying to explain why people have foot fetishes. I get the cross-wiring part, but am not sure I get the whole article, i.e., it doesn't feel like a completely definitive reason....I guess it's still open to discussion. Would love to hear other's thoughts/opinions. All I know is a guy's feet make me horny as hell.

http://bit.ly/qofsUz

[Franz]

Gamsky, the "scientist's" article of course makes precisely the sort and type of commentary that is commonly reflective of the state of mind and belief that identifies an inveterate neo-Newtonian, pseudo-scientific, intellectual "flat-earther" type of mentality found in individuals (and entire professional groups) who enthusiastically "believe" and endorse the neo-Enlightenment mode of thought that came to the fore in the West during the last half of the 18th century. I can only speculate, but it sounds to me like the referenced scientist is attracted to the idea of having his feet "licked" and "toes sucked" but doesn't have a clue about why he does--so he posits cranium "mis-wiring", e.g., thus he can tell himself he has a "scientific explanation" for all human behavior. Pure balderdash!

[ftlaudft]

Science can't give us all the answers, but I'm grateful to those scientists who have found cures for diseases, improved technologies and given us TVs, computers and automobiles. No one ever landed on the moon with directions from the Baltimore catechism. Of course, there are still those who favor the popes who challenged Galileo and there are also the modern Evangelical politicos who dispute evolution.

Vilanayar Ramachandran has done impressive work in his cross-wiring studies and his findings should be taken seriously. Those of us who are serious about the origins of foot fetishism will want to explore his theories further.

There will always be those who want to go back to the good old days that used to be and never were. Many religious institutions have lost their moral authority and we don't accept their ultimate pronouncements on all matters as we used to.

For modern scientific questions, I think I'll put my trust in modern science for the answers.

[Franz]

Well, my goodness! OK, so we also need I suppose to also thank those nifty humanitarian scientists who invented--let's see, now--dynamite, aeriel bombs, the atom and nuclear bombs, A/C bombers, not to mention GMC frankenfoods, and a whole host of other scientific biowarfar blessings, um? You've set up a 'straw man', ftlaudft, and then you gleefully delight in blowing him down. I personally have no interest in a priest-dominated temporal disorder, a rabbinical dominated society, or a puritannical pious pastor ruled social hive myself. Scientists are all human beings, and like all human beings they are an infinitely varied lot in terms of their humanitarian and ethical values. Let us not divinize any of those pathetic humans who lust to deminate and control/rule the rest of us...and scientists are most all of them ultimately dedicated to controlling all of Nature and all of us who are naturally a part of it--some for ethical concerns, but many for unethical reasons. That's where free will comes in, my friend; we each of us get to pick and choose for ourselves. The human spirit and human liberty outweigh any self-interested or avariciously motivated individual or groups of individuals.

[ftlaudft]

Thank you, Gamsky, for posting the article on foot fetishism which reflects the work of Vilanayar Ramachandran, a distinguished neuroscientist from the University of California, San Diego. Many of us here believe in education and support the role of science in expanding our intellectual frontiers.

[flickfire]

I've heard that theory before. If the "cross wiring" theory is true, then I guess it mostly
affects mostly men, because I read that men are far more likely to have fetishes than
women. I guess it's all in the wiring of the brain. It is interesting.

[vegasguy]

Phantom foot is 'sexy'? What about the people who have 2 feet. I realize we live in a world of fucking stupid people, or F S P for short, but now I have heard everything.

[ftlaudft]

I have nothing more to add to this thread. It's a great disappointment to me to see members of this community attack with such rudeness and a lack of civility a distinguished neuroscientist who has studied foot fetishism seriously. Perhaps on another site, in another thread, there will be a meaningful discussion.

[Footlover28]

I have nothing more to add to this thread. It's a great disappointment to me to see members of this community attack with such rudeness and a lack of civility a distinguished neuroscientist who has studied foot fetishism seriously. Perhaps on another site, in another thread, there will be a meaningful discussion.

You took the words right out of my mouth.

[drummer]

I'd be interested in reading more about that study, because I didn't quite understand what was being said about the "sexiness" of the phantom limb--and it sounded rather intriguing.

What I find a bit puzzling though, is that for me, there's a strong VISUAL component to the fetish: in other words, I respond to certain VIEWS of the male foot. It's hard for me to imagine this as having anything to do with my brain's "body map," which seems to have more to do with my own sense of feeling in my own feet.

But then, I don't really have the background to understand anything but the most basic sort of explanation of neurology.

In the old days, we had a physician on this message board who could probably have explained more about this to me, but I don't know what became of him.

[ropedfeet]

I myself personally really have never wondered why I have my kinks, and I also have rather not ever wanted to know why either. I know I enjoy it and I leave it at that.

I question the validity of books on dream analysis in the same way because I think that things of the mind are not always the same, or have the same meaning or represent the same things to different people. As they say, sometimes a cigar is just a damned cigar.

Unless a thing is causing you distress or making you do bad or unsafe things I say why ask why?

Especially with things that as subjective as sexual turn ons. I think there can be many reasons why someone likes something and another person likes the same thing.

but thats just me.

My favorite color is purple. I know that I love that color. I can get great pleasure from staring at a purple wall or being surrounded by that color in a room. Do I need to find out why? I say no.

[Franz]

Right on, Ropie. It's been my experience that, as soon as you start asking 'the why' of something and try to analyze and label it, over-analysis and asking the other man "why?" can easily give a guy icks and jitters about even enjoying it with you. I have myself always eschewed analysis when it comes to enjoying sex with a man, and interestingly over the years and my many liasons and affairs not one guy ever felt any apparent need to get involved in asking "why". A number of different men, though, did comment to me that it was great that we just relaxed and enjoyed one another together without trying to analyze the experience or ask the why of it. So, here again, I agree with you fully, Ropie.

[cheesehead]

Ahh, the old ignorance is bliss argument. I for one do not agree with that noxious philosophy. Some of us choose to become enlightened about ourselves and the world we live in and that can only be accomplished through the acquisition of knowledge.

[ropedfeet]

Hey, that's great Cheesehead. Many things in this life do warrant clinical dissection, scrutiny, and understanding.

I just personally don't feel the need to have a "reason", of that type, for what makes me hit the ceiling in the bedroom.


Kinda takes some of the excitement out of it for me. Y'know?



And as I said I personally don't feel that "one size fits all" in these cases. Plus a lot of times these people are wrong.


But to each their own. We can all choose what works for us

[Tklduuude]

I have nothing more to add to this thread. It's a great disappointment to me to see members of this community attack with such rudeness and a lack of civility a distinguished neuroscientist who has studied foot fetishism seriously. Perhaps on another site, in another thread, there will be a meaningful discussion.

Of course....obviously the only person allowed to make attacks on any group is FtLaudFt

[vegasguy]

Of course....obviously the only person allowed to make attacks on any group is FtLaudFt

I know his post was meant for me and I really don't care. Give me a break! Comparing a foot fetish with phantom foot syndrome? That neuro whatever he is, is a quack, pure and simple. He is an idiot to be blunt! He most likely wasted much needed dollars for his so called study, that could have been put to much better use. I for one, do not think there is a reason, or something in my brain telling me I like feet. It's just there and I love it. I don't need a label or some idiot quack telling me I am compared to something totally irrelevant. Anyway, feel free everyone to discuss the context of the article. I won't say any more.

[tenchichan]

Just because YOU don't need something doesn't mean someone else doesn't-- or that it shouldn't exist.

My god you are a bunch of self-centered queens. If it doesn't pertain to you then fuck it and the horse it rode in on. That's great that you're not interested in this, that or the other, but if you're so uninterested then why do you go on and on and on about how uninterested you are?

Why do you have to try and shit over everybody's parade? What is that accomplishing. We get it, you don't think this pertains to you, FINE! Move on with your fucking lives then. Go back to doing something that interests you. Unless-- no! Could it be? Why yes-- I think causing drama is what you're REALLY interested in.

[ftlaudft]

C'mon, guys! Why are we being rude to each other? It's OK to disagree. It's Ok to like something or not like something. It's OK to be interested in something or not be interested in something. But can't we say what we think without punching below the belt?

With the Net we've watched the rise of a new kind of bully: the cyberbully!'But we don't have to be like that. When I surf the Net, I see hateful attacks made on the most innocent remarks and I see many people deleting their posts just to avoid being attacked.

We're so lucky to have these discussions at all. In some of the recent posts, there have been comments on the pain of coming out as a foot fetishist. It should be something we all can relate to. Why spoil the discussion with nasty attacks?

Some people enjoy understanding themselves a little more through the advances science is making. The theories that have developed from observing amputees may seem bizarre, but some of us want to explore them. If we're trying to understand ourselves and figure out who we are, why attack? And if you want to say that you're happy without self-understanding and further scientific study, can't you say it without being nasty about it?

Let's not be cyberbullies ourselves. We've got a good thing going here. Let's enjoy it and each other.

[Tklduuude]

C'mon, guys! Why are we being rude to each other? It's OK to disagree. It's Ok to like something or not like something. It's OK to be interested in something or not be interested in something. But can't we say what we think without punching below the belt?

With the Net we've watched the rise of a new kind of bully: the cyberbully!'But we don't have to be like that. When I surf the Net, I see hateful attacks made on the most innocent remarks and I see many people deleting their posts just to avoid being attacked.

We're so lucky to have these discussions at all. In some of the recent posts, there have been comments on the pain of coming out as a foot fetishist. It should be something we all can relate to. Why spoil the discussion with nasty attacks?

Some people enjoy understanding themselves a little more through the advances science is making. The theories that have developed from observing amputees may seem bizarre, but some of us want to explore them. If we're trying to understand ourselves and figure out who we are, why attack? And if you want to say that you're happy without self-understanding and further scientific study, can't you say it without being nasty about it?

Let's not be cyberbullies ourselves. We've got a good thing going here. Let's enjoy it and each other.

For the record...I have sent a personal apology to VegasGuy (by means other than this forum to ensure he reads it should he choose not to re-visit this thread) who thought I was referring to him when I said:

Of course....obviously the only person allowed to make attacks on any group is FtLaudFt

I was not referring to him. It was directed towards FtLaudFt who wrote:

Science can't give us all the answers, but I'm grateful to those scientists who have found cures for diseases, improved technologies and given us TVs, computers and automobiles. No one ever landed on the moon with directions from the Baltimore catechism. Of course, there are still those who favor the popes who challenged Galileo and there are also the modern Evangelical politicos who dispute evolution.

Everyone....ask yourselves why he did not stop at:

Science can't give us all the answers, but I'm grateful to those scientists who have found cures for diseases, improved technologies and given us TVs, computers and automobiles

But continued on with:

No one ever landed on the moon with directions from the Baltimore catechism. Of course, there are still those who favor the popes who challenged Galileo

And then writes:

C'mon, guys! Why are we being rude to each other?

With the Net we've watched the rise of a new kind of bully: the cyberbully!'But we don't have to be like that

Let's not be cyberbullies ourselves. We've got a good thing going here. Let's enjoy it and each other.

FtLaudFt should take his own advice.

[ftlaudft]

Tklduude, let me repeat, we can disagree with each other, but we can do it in a civil way.

I have ongoing discussions with Roman Catholic friends about theology, philosophy, catechisms, and new schools of thought. We agree on some things, and we disagree on others. But we never call each stupid and we never get mad at each other.

I have ongoing discussions with Jewish friends about the meaning of Yom Kippur, the Jewish dietary regulations, ethics, morals and what have you. We agree on many things and disagree on others. But we don't call each other names, we don't swear at each other, and we remain friends who enjoy talking about life together.

It seems so strange to have this discussion here on a thread that deals with the origins of foot fetishism. This should have been a fun thread and a learning experience. For those who don't like the theories that have evolved from the scientist in California, it's OK not to understand them and not to accept them. But we can disagree in a nice way.

[Tklduuude]

FtLaudFt

Ask yourself...and everyone who reads this should ask themselves...

Is this quote from FtLaudFt "civil or nice"?

No one ever landed on the moon with directions from the Baltimore catechism. Of course, there are still those who favor the popes who challenged Galileo and there are also the modern Evangelical politicos who dispute evolution.

I repeat...FtLaudFt should take his own advice.

[ftlaudft]

Tiklduude, let me share with you a story from my life dealing with the catechism and maybe you'll understand where I'm coming from

I'm a white Lutheran, and years ago my church had an information class where we were supposed to be able to ask questions. But when we tried to ask questions that were meaningful to us, the pastor made it very clear that the only questions tolerated were the questions asked by the catechism and the only answers that were acceptable were the answers given by Dr Martin Luther himself. No other questions. No other answers.

I think we have to learn to think outside the catechism, whether it's the Lutheran Catechism, the Baltimore Catechism, or whatever book contains the prescribed questions and answers of a particular group. The catechism has a purpose, and it helps people understand basic tenets of faith. But it can't answer modern scientific questions, and it wasn't designed to.

Religion has a place in our lives, and so does science. They don't contradict each other, and in fact they should complete each other. But trouble arises when one group thinks it has the only answers and tries to impose.

A close friend of mine is Italian Catholic. She tells me that she belonged to the only Italian Catholic family in her town. Can you believe the Ku Klux Klan burned fiery crosses in her front yard to make sure her family got the message that differences of opinion were not tolerated. Our nasty words are those fiery crosses today.

I mention Galileo because there has never been a better example of the errors of a religious group and its reluctance to accept progress. Do you know how many centuries passed before the responsible parties admitted that Galileo was right? Do do you know what the beliefs are concerning homosexuality that are held by Catholics, Protestant groups, Jews and Muslims? If you are Catholic, or Protestant, or Jewish, or Muslim, do you want to wait around for the next few centuries before the attitudes change?

You've got to think outside the catechism. Use the catechism for what it was intended, a teaching tool. And use science to help us all move forward in a new age.

Talk nice. Enjoy feet. We're here only for a short while.

[Tklduuude]

FtLaudFt

You wrote-

Talk nice. Enjoy feet. We're here only for a short while.

I do not visit this site for anything besides that.

Why do you stray from your own advice?

[ftlaudft]

In a discussion of foot fetishism, I read the following comment from Yahoo¡ Answers:

It probably has to do with the fact that in the brain, the part that controls sensation in the genitals is right next to the part that controls sensation in the feet and there is some overlap.

Perhaps an explanation using terms of overlap, rather than cross-wiring and references to phantom foot sensations, might have seemed less spooky to readers.

Apologies to Gamsky for getting so sidetracked from his original post.

[tenchichan]

FtLaudFt

You wrote-

Talk nice. Enjoy feet. We're here only for a short while.

I do not visit this site for anything besides that.

Why do you stray from your own advice?


http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y165/tenchichan/tumblr_lh6karBLTf1qdxqx9o1_400.gif

[cheesehead]

At first I was wondering why this has become such a heated debate, but now I'm starting to suspect that the real culprit here is fear. Those of us who have such a problem with a scientific explanation for what causes our foot fetishes are afraid that if the cause is revealed either through science or psychology that our fetish will be further pathologized and we may be forced to change it.
However, having a foot fetish is already considered a pathology by the establishment anyway and I would prefer that it be found out that it is rooted in biology rather than be considered a psychological "state of mind" because if it is rooted in biology then the psychiatric profession cannot pressure one into "therapy" as easily over a biological wiring of the brain.
I also suspect that some of us are afraid that if it is a state of mind and they realize the psychological "root" or cause that somehow their fetish will vanish like the stars at sunrise. I for one don't believe that simply knowing the cause of my fetish will threaten it's existence. It's as much a part of my sexual orientation as being gay, and one cannot change their sexual orientation, at least not to a very signifigant degree.

[ftlaudft]

Cheesehead, thank you for putting a positive spin on our heated words. You're right. I think fear is an element here. The truth sets us free, but it also makes us change our belief systems, our value systems and our behavior codes. When the Dalai Lama was asked what he would do if a scientist proved that a Buddhist doctrine was wrong, he replied without hesitation, "'I would change the Buddhist doctrine."' We need more of that attitude.

[ropedfeet]

I just want to say that I stand by my previous posts on this topic as my personal opinion on this topic. My words explain exactly how I personally feel about it and why. :)

To each their own.

[vegasguy]

Just because YOU don't need something doesn't mean someone else doesn't-- or that it shouldn't exist.

My god you are a bunch of self-centered queens. If it doesn't pertain to you then fuck it and the horse it rode in on. That's great that you're not interested in this, that or the other, but if you're so uninterested then why do you go on and on and on about how uninterested you are?

Why do you have to try and shit over everybody's parade? What is that accomplishing. We get it, you don't think this pertains to you, FINE! Move on with your fucking lives then. Go back to doing something that interests you. Unless-- no! Could it be? Why yes-- I think causing drama is what you're REALLY interested in.

Who pissed in your corn flakes?

[ftlaudft]

"Who pissed in your corn flakes?" I really wish we had an English language academy, the way the French and Spanish do, that rewards linguistic innovation. If they handed out prizes for colorful language, this would surely get one.

And Tenchichan is no slouch when it comes to vigorous expression of thought either. I'm still trying to picture the whole metaphor of "'f.... it and the horse it rode in on."'

Future generations will study FootBuddies posts and gasp in admiration!

[Franz]

Good for you, Ropie. Stick to your guns. It strikes me that what got some of the contributing members to this string worked up was one contributor repeatedly saying in so many words that those who disagreed with that "scientist" either (a) didn't understand what he was saying (meaning they're dimwitted) or (b) declaiming on his apparent premise that only "scientists" can or should make pronouncements on weighty social topics since, as he apparently likes to believe, only "scientists" are purely disinterested and objective 'seekers of truth'--because they are scientists. Calls to mind the old aphorism: "Mathematics doesn't lie but mathematicians do". Amen. Like Ropie, I retract nothing and am sticking to my guns. 'Nuf said.

[BootsMcGraw]

Ya know... I go away for a weekend, and all hell breaks loose.

This thread has degraded from its original topic to a junior-high-school bout of "I disagree with you, therefore you are wrong and a bad person."

Shame on all of you. Topic closed.