Fetishes: can we be born with them?

[steve25805 126,023]

Can we be born with fetishes, including pee fetishes? Or must they be learned? Because I do kind of suspect that I may have been born with mine. To explain why I need to make a very personal revelation. I was way too young to remember this of course, but my mother has said that when I was so young I couldn't yet even crawl, let alone walk, and she needed to change my nappy/diaper, I thought it funny to pee in her direction and laughed when it hit her, finding this funny. My siblings never did this and I have never heard of other babies doing this regularly.

Is this evidence of a pee fetish being hard-wired into me from the very start? Unfortunately, there is no way to remember what I actually felt at the time, so my own guess is no better than anyone else's.

[Admin 14,788]

This is actually a really interesting discussion; unfortunately not one I can contribute something of much use to, as I really don't remember what it was that got me interested in pee. It seems many people can pinpoint a particular experience, but I don't think I can. Whether this means I actually was born with it, or whether something involving pee happened to me at an age before I can remember, I do not know.

[F.W 5,734]

Not sure if born with it,but i do remember being very young the first time i saw a girl pee,and ive been hooked ever since,for good or bad.

[spywareonya 37,961]

we are born with them for the simple reason, ask any true scientists, that fetishism DO NOT EXIST

we are programmed to be aroused by ANYTHING that relates to vulnerability, intimacy, or more-directly crotch displaying

the sick people called "normal" where afraid of exceedingly visceral sensations and morally outlawed them, which is absurd

fetishism is normality

not-fetishism is repression and mental illness

[Scot_Lover 1,877]

This is all fine, but what about the odd ones out? Some people have no idea what they are suppressing or they can be trained to like something that previously went against all their upbringing.

I can still, to this day, see Mary in the bottom of a bath being splattered by both Maigh and myself, with Mary laughing and coughing that "This is really gross." Maigh just laughed and said "Yeah right, fine just move over a little."

When we first met her, she was the sweetest girl you could hope to meet, prim and proper, knee length skirts, blouses that covered her up to her chin, a librarian type of girl. She was horrified at what we showed her, but within a month, she was, in the best Borg tradition, one of us.

Does this mean that she had something deeply hidden away and we woke the sleeper in her? 

Or did we just give her something, no matter how distasteful (lol, sorry Mary) that she grabbed onto and kept it ever since?

[spywareonya 37,961]

6 minutes ago, Scot_Lover said:

Borg tradition

connoisseur ahahahahaha

 

6 minutes ago, Scot_Lover said:

Does this mean that she had something deeply hidden away and we woke the sleeper in her?

it works like that for everything

people's junk DNA is the same for every human

it had been baptized junk just because is silent and sleeping and is activated only through intense hormonal stimulation

it produces all mutations, both cancers and evolution

in our core, all human are identical

we almost have no distinctive traits

we all love everything, unless what is unhealty

I am not saying anyway that character is an illusion

truth is more subtle:

character is a sum up of the portion of totality that we already mastered and discovered

mine is different than yours

but if we were to live a billion years and have time to explore all of ourselves, in the end we will be incredibly similar, character not abandoned but TRANSCENDED

human DNA is identical between all of us at the (roghly, the exact number is longer but) 99%

the 1% of difference relates almost only to physical traits

character is really almost unexistent

only deep unconscious traits can be really individualistic, we are talking about 0,11%, which equates to  1/1000 of our DNA

that is what make every human really unique, but usually, when talking about each of us being unique, we fail at it and instead refer to the differences between all of us, which come NOT from that 0,11% of utterly unique DNA, but from the different portion of the 99,89% common-to-all that we discovered, each of us a portion only

thus, until Mastering both the 99,89% common to all AND the 0,11% unique to all, we are not "all different", we are just "all differently deformed and partial"

fetishists are closer to self-Mastering than repressed hypocrites, thus we are more evolved

we are a superior race that transcends ethnies and nations

[bpb 788]

11 minutes ago, Scot_Lover said:

Or did we just give her something, no matter how distasteful (lol, sorry Mary) that she grabbed onto and kept it ever since?

My vote would be that she changed.  Her mind was set by her upbringing.  She was shown that it could be otherwise and that it could be fun!

[paul66 171]

I dont know about other "fetish", but with pee like we are all born.

In Germany and austria, a word for peeing is brunzen.

Brunzen= Brunst=oestrus=heat, by the animals.

Urine contains pheromones, humans got not a oestrus-heat time in the year.

But when a heaalthy natural man a woman see and smell peeing specialy in unusaly place, he got rockhard, and I mean every healthy natural man (not shitdicks)

opposite by a natural woman, got wet from that sight.

Older people know that all, only the fck. religion and school education learn people, pee is bäbä (ugly)

I can tell what is ugly, and that are shitdicks, and 60 some differnt genders.

Peeing and the arousal about it, is NOT a fetish, almost all People got aroused about, everybody from a other kind of peeplay.

That is natural, from a fetish you only can talk, when low percentage of people are aroused about.

How I say, almost all(natural healthy ) people are aroused about pee, from a fetish in our days is only tlked, because most of the people do not admit...

only because the education of our politics.

Look what they(want) teach and PROMOTE today :

Its normal shitdicks wedding in catholic church, and atopt children, for the best... boys......

its normal you are born as womn/man, and feel your other gender... so far 60 some differnt genders.

Urine is dirty.... peeing out of toilet forbidden.

No guys they want teach me sick things now are regular, and normal natural things are sick???

They CAN NOT TEACH ME THAT FUCKING BULLSHIT, Im healthy and natural.

I dont believe that Left green Stasi motherfuckers, they only want to destroy our free western world.

[WantonLee 861]

Interesting question; I have asked myself the same thing for a while now.

First lets start with defining "fetish". The Wikipedia-Article begins with this sentence "Sexual fetishism or erotic fetishism is a sexual fixation on a nonliving object or nongenital body part."

Well; I can only speak for myself, but, if that is the case, I do not have a fetish, as my interest revolves around the ACT of urinating (more specifically: naughty peeing). So, is this a fetish or not?

Another definition I tend to agree more with would be that a fetish is some"thing" or some activity that is not directly related to sexual activity and/or the primary or secondary sexual characteristics. I would say that urinating is "only" indirectly related to the primary sexual characteristics, as this activity has nothing in common with the actual sexual activity as such.

However, and here I can not only just speak for myself, but also only as a male human ;), the sensation of urine flowing through the urethra can be as such arousing, as it excites the nerves at the underside of the penis, which (at least I) like to .. err... manually stimulate for pleasure. (Wow, what a complicated way of saying "wanking" null )

 

This of cause does not explain why I am also aroused by damaging or defiling something by peeing on it, or just watching someone (preferably a lady) doing this. I would like to call this "second level arousal", as this arousal is not triggered by a stimulus coming from ones body, but by observing something related to the original - bodily - stimulation.

 

I wonder if empathy is related to this whole  "getting aroused by seeing someone else doing something that - would oneself do it - would be self-arousing"-thing. I mean the same mechanism that triggers us when we see  someone else who, for instance, gets hurt, and we - although not hurt ourself - also cringe and ... well, feel with that person.*
*Funfact: while in the German language the word "Empathie" is the literal translation for "empathy" (the "ie" at the end is pronounced "ee", like in "weed") - this word (Empathie) is considered a more technical term, and much like someone speaking English might more commonly use "compassion" instead of "empathy", the German word for this would be "Mitgefühl". "Mit" means "with", and "Gefühl" means "feeling". So it literally means "withfeeling", or rather "feeling with (someone)". And I think it's a pretty accurate description of what empathy actually is.

You feel with someone else, like... your brain tries to change your point of view to make it fit the point of view of someone else. The story of Phineas Gage sheds some light on what is going on here, as he managed to get a part of his frontal lobe removed by an iron rod, but he survived and made a full recovery... well, almost. His behavior changed later, quite a lot. In short, he lost a great deal of his empathy. Long story short: as far as I know, the frontal lobe houses something called mirror neurons, which get activated when observing other beings under certain conditions (doesn't even have to be the same species, as long as the being observed shares enough similarities with the observing being (the one with the mirror neurons).

Long story even shorter:  Mirror neurons appear to be the essential biological "hardware" necessary for being able to be emphatic.

 

Ok, back to the topic: why do I get aroused by seeing a lady pee in some naught way?

Maybe it is due to empathy that I... somehow ... see myself in her place? Subconsciously my brain draws a connection...? Only an idea, but I feel it points in the right direction, as for instance I do not get aroused (or much much less), when the lady in question is not enjoying her naught act. This kind of cuts my connection to her, as for me it IS arousing, and I do it deliberately... not by accident or in a nonchalant/indifferent way. (Hence wetting-accidents or nonchalant naughty peeing does nothing for me.)

 

 

Ok... so much for this.... so.. why does naughty peeing arouse me in the first place?

As far as I can tell, there could have been a trigger-event for me. When I was much younger (don't remember, maybe like 8 or so?) I witnessed a boy only slightly younger then me - which I was visiting that particular day - jumping on his freshly made bed and peeing on it. Rather gleefully, if I remember correctly. He later got scolded for this, as well as spanked, by his mother - which I was unfortunate to have to listen to after I was complimented out of the room.

Anyway: the image of someone standing on his bed and gleefully peeing on it got stuck. During my childhood it got almost forgotten, but during my sexual awakening it somehow re-emerged and has never left me since. However, the thing that got stuck was not the image of the boy peeing on his bed, but rather the act of gleefully and deliberately peeing on a bed (or something that could be similarly spoiled by pee) itself. As a fantasy, the protagonist is always somewhat my own age (or at least my perceived age; I am 40+, but I FEEL more like 30+), and of cause changed the gender to female.

I am not sure why this is (I mean the act of deliberately and gleefully ruining something by urinating on it becoming an arousing fantasy of mine), but I suspect that it is related to the fact that this behavior is deemed unacceptable and subject to punishment (btw., spanking is not on my list; in case someone wonders).

Maybe showing this kind of behavior is a way of... rebelling? ...against a (perceived) oppression?

Has it to do with (showing) dominance? Giving one the feeling of being more powerful then one really is (or one thinks one is)?

Is destructive behavior something that - when expressed - is joyful (by nature)? At least to some extend? By everyone or just some people? (Again: giving one the feeling of having power, being in control - instead of being controlled,  being the subject of (a) power?)

 

Sorry for providing more questions then answers. -_-

 

Edited May 8, 2018 by WantonLee

[spywareonya 37,961]

@WantonLee

the overall analysis is great

in fact Empathy in greek means exactly "feeling alongside with somebody else"

the answers you came up in the end are good answers

everything that brings along a sensation of power makes people feel healthy, the confidence of an action is the key

same said for physical sensation

when I pee in naughty/public places I show the fact that I upheld the Laws of Nature much more than those of men and this is healthy, he who sees me or read my account is aroused