has anybody had a very negative reaction to this fetish?

[brownsville]

Hey, the other day i saw a forum post where a guy admitted to a crying fetish and wanted to know if he was weird. now i personally can dig that crying fetish because i guess that part of my SF is to do with vulnerability. the responses this guy got were outrageous: " you like to see women cry you sicko?" " oh my dog died today, would you have had a good w*** about that?" saying " what a great friend you must be- when youre friends upset do you sit there touching yourself up!!" somebody suggested that if he found it so arousing that people should be upset you should " put a bullet in his head! " i think what he said had been totally taken the wrong way and people were horrified and thought of him going around pleasuring himself at other peoples distress.

i have never told, i have only implied to a very open minded friend of mine who is very liberal and knows me well enough to know that i wouldnt mean that i "enjoy" peoples discomfort etc. we here lots of positive "coming out" stories on SFF - but has anybody here told and got a very negative reaction? id be interested to know...

[Natto]

People can be vastly insensitive about these things. Having a fetish doesn't imply going around trying to make it happen, for god's sake, and it's not like people choose to have one, they just do. Hateful speech like that shouldn't be taken seriously.

[Jemmabean]

Worst reaction I've ever gotten was "don't talk about that, I don't want to know." She was a prudish bitch anyway.

[Prodigy]

First of all, my SO has a crying fetish, and I worried about things like that at first, too. I wasn't afraid that he'd hurt me on purpose or anything, but I didn't want him trying to take advantage of me if I was in a particularly fragile state. When I put myself in his shoes, though, I realised that maybe he had the same worries about my fetish. Would I set off his allergies all the time on purpose? Would I assault him when he needs rest if he was sick? It's about self control when acting on your fantasies.

I believe everyone has a "little something" that gets them going, whether they are open to it or not, and for those people to be so insensitive is heartbreaking, but also understandable... We fear the unknown, and if one is not "well-versed" in the world of fetishes, it is easy to mistake one for an excuse to use it maliciously.

Back to the question at hand, though... I haven't had a negative reaction, but I am careful about who gets to know my secret.

[Sternuto]

I told my (ex)girlfreind early on in the relationship. I had never seen her sneeze before, and I was hoping the extra info would inspire her.

For over THREE years... I never saw her sneeze. I saw supreme stifles (no sound. plugged her nose and an ever so slight head bob) and I would always say "just SNEEZE" bee-awtch... but she wouldnt.

Bitch left me.

[Adrilynn]

You know, there are a lot of fetishes out there, and a LOT of them are pretty weird. I use to feel like a freak for enjoying watching people sneeze, but why should I? I know someone who likes to be tied up and gagged and hit with a rubber whip. This, to me, seems at LEAST as physically uncomfortable as a tickley nose and a few sneezes. And there are people who get off of both ends of this bondage and it's VERY common. And noone thinks THEY are freaks... at least, not most people. I would never have thought that a little bondage or leather made you a freak, but here *I* was feeling like a freak because *my* fetish was _uncommon_.

I know someone who likes the concept of a hypnotists or a spell putting them under mind control and turning them into a willing sex servant. I know people who enjoy inflicting or receiving minor pain (like dripping hot wax on them, or biting, or pulling their hair). I know people who enjoy the idea (but not the reality) of being raped. I know people who like PIERCINGS or TATTOOS on... *sensitive* body part. I know people who like it in the butt (which I have never tried but it SEEMS to me that it would be quite uncomfortable)...

None of these things sound *pleasant* to me. And yet, PURELY because they are more POPULAR, or more COMMONLY ACCEPTED then sneezing as a turn on, *I* felt like a freak. No one ever TOLD me I was, I just FELT it.

Then I told my SO.... and I came *here* and I started to see it for what it really was:

It's no more painful for the receiving end then many, many of the other, more common fetishes out there. It's not less consensual either. I would never make someone sneeze against their will in real life... as for fantasy, well, there are decent people who fantasies about non-consensual sex or cheating on their spouse all the time. It doesn't mean they'd ever really do it, or even be turned on by the reality of it. Heck, I LOVE scary stories like the Ring or the Grudge, that doesn't mean I would REMOTELY enjoy that sort of scenario in real life (in fact, I would die ). I don't get turned on when a loved one is truly suffering from a server allergy attack or illness, and I don't enjoy seeing people hurt. In fact, there is a strong maternal kind of thing to it. I like to take care of people and make them feel *better*, and so do many of us.

And if I get a little "jolt" from watching people sneeze in public, or on TV, or in a story how is that any different then a person who gets that same pleasant feeling from watching a woman in way to tight black leather or a barely there outfit cut way too high and way too low? How is my wanting to see Bill (from True Blood) sneeze any different then the fan service they give men of young woman in the shower with big boobs and tight butts? It's not. The only difference is it's not COMMON.

In fact if anything it's pretty harmless. sweet, and rather chaste. I can enjoy my fetish, write about it, and talk about it in public, at work, in front of children... and no one would ever know it had anything to do with sex. It gives me a pleasurable, involuntary feeling to watch people sneeze, but it doesn't make me want to have sex with them.

Anyway, in short *I* use to think having a sneezing fetish was bad... but I was just self conscious. It's not as bad as I thought. and it's no worse then most of the more commonly accepted mainstream fetishes out there.

Sorry this got so long. this is.... almost an Epiphany for me. *soft smile*

[count tiszula]

You are absolutely right, Adrilynn. I too used to have irrational feelings of guilt about my interest simply because it is apparently uncommon, though heaven knows why this should be or even if it really is. I have devoted a long time to convincing myself that enjoying sneezing is in reality completely normal. And in the eyes of the world it is about the tamest thing that you can imagine; as a recent YouTube poster said, "It's so tame I'd let my five-year-old niece watch that site". Unfortunately, I can't give details of that vid because the person who posted it was 17 or something, and since she goes on to fake a sneeze to illustrate her point about how tame it is, the doctrine here is that I would be unable to prevent myself from seeking her out, travelling to her and having consensual sexual intercourse with her.

Of course this is just a community concerned largely with fantasy, as most fetish sites, indeed most internet sites, are. No one is going to travel halfway round the world to have sexual intercourse with someone they've seen sneeze once on a grainy video, any more than they're going to do the same to somone they've seen dancing lasciviously in a bikini; still less is anyone going to do the same to a person they happen to see sneeze a hundred yards away in a supermarket.

Most people do not even notice that they are sneezing; the idea that they suffer some sort of dreadful pain and suffering is absurd. And how can they be made to sneeze "against their will" if they don't even know they're doing it? Given the number of people who actually enjoy sneezing, it is more likely that making someone sneeze would be to their advantage. It would almost certainly be good for their health, unless the possibility of severe allergies arises.

Telling people about the fetish, though? Most unwise. Unreason rules.

[~~~]

I know someone who likes to be tied up and gagged and hit with a rubber whip.

I know someone who likes the concept of a hypnotists or a spell putting them under mind control and turning them into a willing sex servant. I know people who enjoy inflicting or receiving minor pain (like dripping hot wax on them, or biting, or pulling their hair). I know people who enjoy the idea (but not the reality) of being raped. I know people who like PIERCINGS or TATTOOS on... *sensitive* body part.

Ha. You just named off a whole bunch of stuff i'm into. And yea, I see your point. Even though I feel that my love for pain is really the most extreme of my fetishes, it's somehow easier to come out and say than liking sneezing.You're right about that and it being all on whats common or obscure. I am lucky though. I don't hide my fetish ( save for from family members since they don't need to know what gets me going) and i've yet to get a negative reaction. If I did get a negative reaction for that one i'd have to unleash a whole bunch of weird on them and see what they thought then XD.

[Vetinari]

To go back to Brownsville's original question, I think there's a huge difference between telling people on a forum and telling someone with whom you are intimate (whether that be within a sexual relationship or a close friendship). There are a lot of forums out there and few are as forgiving as this one. Telling random people in a public way where they have to react in public is likely to ellicit the reaction your friend experienced. Even if there were people who were interested rather than disgusted, once the disgust had started they probably would feel awkward in reacting in a different way and might fail to speak up. People who are already your friends and know you have externally been a perfectly normal person in every way may decide they don't particularly like the idea but they will probably not just react in the knee-jerk way you describe.

I think it may also depend on HOW you tell. There are people in this community who seem to tell people quite casually and I think they can bring themselves to tell it as if it's just something fun that they enjoy rather than the "OMG I'm weird and you may not like this" method which is what many of us would probably feel like doing.

If the fetish is important to you, I think that it is important within a relationship that you can tell the person and that they don't respond badly, especially if you are considering whether you want to spend the rest of your life with them. When I was younger it seemed to me that the relationship and the way I felt was the be-all-and-end-all and should be preserved at any cost but I have learned over time that if you are in a relationship and can't be yourself because the other person doesn't really approve, it isn't going to be an entirely happy experience. I would be very wary of continuing a relationship where the other person finds some part of me that is so intimate and important to me unacceptable.

[Nevyn]

I once had a girlfriend who I told about the fetish, and she was basically ok with it all the time we were together. But after we broke up we still remained friends and saw each other socially etc, and she got very uncomfortable if she had to sneeze (which she often did) because she knew what it did to me. So it was kind of awkward for a while, and in the end I had to pretend I'd "lost" the fetish and it no longer had any effect on me. That's not a particularly negative experience, but it was the best I could come up with

[Demon327]

I have. I believe that my ex-wife (no this is not why she is my EX-wife) basically put up with it in the beginning. But, as the relationship went on, she became less tolerant of it. She would no longer tell me observations and claimed that I spent too much time here on the forum and it was all silly. I personally am very particular about telling anyone about either of my fetishes. I have only told two people that I have not been intimate with about my sneezing fetish outside of the community. As for the other one, less than half the people that know the first one know the second one. I feel that it is a very personal part of me and is to be shared with a select few people.

[Mr Sneezy]

I have. I believe that my ex-wife (no this is not why she is my EX-wife) basically put up with it in the beginning. But, as the relationship went on, she became less tolerant of it. She would no longer tell me observations and claimed that I spent too much time here on the forum and it was all silly. I personally am very particular about telling anyone about either of my fetishes. I have only told two people that I have not been intimate with about my sneezing fetish outside of the community. As for the other one, less than half the people that know the first one know the second one. I feel that it is a very personal part of me and is to be shared with a select few people.

Quite right. i've lost a couple of friendships with people I trusted over the fetish.

One who I thought was a bit more open-minded and unshockable than that. Putting programs into my computer, she couldn't help but notice the amount of sneezing files I had there. After that "revelation", she sneezed on a couple of occasions, but managed to make them sound like a cough. Haven't heard from her in 3 years.

The other one was even worse because she had been helping me out with my fetish(es) for ten years and ended up turning it all against me in a very nasty way.

[Here Secretly]

Hey, the other day i saw a forum post where a guy admitted to a crying fetish and wanted to know if he was weird. now i personally can dig that crying fetish because i guess that part of my SF is to do with vulnerability. the responses this guy got were outrageous: " you like to see women cry you sicko?" " oh my dog died today, would you have had a good w*** about that?" saying " what a great friend you must be- when youre friends upset do you sit there touching yourself up!!" somebody suggested that if he found it so arousing that people should be upset you should " put a bullet in his head! " i think what he said had been totally taken the wrong way and people were horrified and thought of him going around pleasuring himself at other peoples distress.

i have never told, i have only implied to a very open minded friend of mine who is very liberal and knows me well enough to know that i wouldnt mean that i "enjoy" peoples discomfort etc. we here lots of positive "coming out" stories on SFF - but has anybody here told and got a very negative reaction? id be interested to know...

OMG, there's a crying fetish?? Now I really know what's "wrong" with me for certain!! I mean, all that time I thought the whole sneeze thing was weird and that I was the only one and such and so and then I found this forum and it's nice not to be the only one... but in the meantime, there was that other thing about crying, too, and I just never put two and two together. Oh man... I can't believe I'm so stupid I didn't notice it was almost the same thing. :kicks self: Well, there's that now. Good to know. Anyway, to respond to your question (lest this begin to look like a thread-jack) I'll say this much: I've never had a bad reaction because I've never told a soul. But I ANTICIPATE bad reactions and that's why I don't tell. And yeah, I'm not surprised about that poor fellow above... If a woman said the same thing about seeing men cry, though, I don't think the reaction would be the same. I think it's some sort of backlash against men, really. If a woman said she liked to watch men cry and that it even made her feel aroused, I think even women who DIDN'T feel aroused would say "Well, there's something about a guy whose not afraid to show his feelings..." or something, but when I guy likes to see a woman cry, people assume he's just a jerk. That's terrible, especially since he didn't ASK to feel that way. I sure as heck didn't ask for ANY of this... although... I guess if nothing aroused me my husband would be a pretty frustrated fellow, eh? Say, why do you suppose fetishes exist at all? I mean, from a evolutionary standpoint. What natural purpose can there be?

[lk]

Say, why do you suppose fetishes exist at all? I mean, from a evolutionary standpoint. What natural purpose can there be?

I've been thinking some about how difficult this question would be to answer.

To start, evolutionary explanations are always speculative stories; someone is always suggesting some purpose that a trait might have served. Even if the story makes sense, it's probably impossible to verify that the trait really served that purpose. Then you have to factor in that human beings evolved under Stone Age conditions, and the trait we are talking about is one that we observe under our social and cultural conditions. Finally, there could be a natural, evolutionary purpose for the trait itself, or the trait could be a kind of offshoot or possible consequence of something else that has a natural purpose, such that the trait itself lacks any evolutionary value. It's hard to determine which one of those is actually the case.

So any answer anyone might give would be on pretty shaky ground, I think. Still, it's an interesting question, and speculation is fun, right? So why not give it a shot?

I'll start with exactly what you wrote before you asked that question:

I sure as heck didn't ask for ANY of this... although... I guess if nothing aroused me my husband would be a pretty frustrated fellow, eh?

Back to the basics: a fetish is something that gets you aroused. More specifically, it allows you to get aroused through something that's non-sexual, that doesn't itself require a sexual situation, or even the suggestion of a sexual situation by another person. In the case of this fetish, all that is required is a common event that can be observed all the time, and the psychology of the fetish is such that often the thought of the event is enough to evoke strong sexual feelings.

Wouldn't it make sense that something like that sort of psychology, in general, would be useful for making humans think about and desire sex even when sex is not physically present to them? In some animals, it seems, that sort of physical presence is required; the animals are in heat, the pheromones are exchanged, and sex follows...but if not, then not. But humans aren't like that. On the one hand, they don't just have sex because the they are in heat and the right sort of partner happens by; in that sense, they are less sexually charged. On the other hand, they think about having sex even without that sort of physical presence; in that sense, they are more sexually charged. You can tell some evolutionary story about why we are charged like that, too: we are both social and also mate with partners with whom we raise children (at least some of the time), and so we are going to be around a lot of potential partners that we are not supposed to having sex with, and need to keep our thoughts fixed on the partner we are supposed to be having sex with. Under those conditions, I think it makes evolutionary sense for humans to have the sort of imaginative sexual psychology that we have. I would then speculate that a fetish is some sort of intensification and amplifying of that more general imaginative sexual psychology that all humans have evolved to have. That would make a fetish something that doesn't have an evolutionary purpose, but a possible consequence of a psychology that does have an evolutionary purpose.

Totally speculative, I know. So I will stop there and let other people speculate better.

[Nevyn]

In order for there to be an evolutionary basis for the fetish, wouldn't that imply that the fetish itself was an inherited trait? That's a leap I'm not really comfortable with... There are certainly arguments that the fetish allows one to become aroused when one may not otherwise be able to do so - thus increasing the chance for mating, broadening the gene pool, and encouraging fun times all around, but it has no evolutionary basis unless you can prove it's passed on along generations. And on the other hand, if one is dependent on the fetish to become aroused, surely that decreases the potential for mating etc, which does not serve the standard model of evolution as I understand it. I think it's a very personal thing which may well have a natural function or purpose for the individual, but I don't think it's genetic.

I'd happily speculate more, and as wildly as you like, but I fear this is not the place *goes off to check threadjacking rules*

[lk]

In order for there to be an evolutionary basis for the fetish, wouldn't that imply that the fetish itself was an inherited trait? That's a leap I'm not really comfortable with... There are certainly arguments that the fetish allows one to become aroused when one may not otherwise be able to do so - thus increasing the chance for mating, broadening the gene pool, and encouraging fun times all around, but it has no evolutionary basis unless you can prove it's passed on along generations. And on the other hand, if one is dependent on the fetish to become aroused, surely that decreases the potential for mating etc, which does not serve the standard model of evolution as I understand it. I think it's a very personal thing which may well have a natural function or purpose for the individual, but I don't think it's genetic.

I'd happily speculate more, and as wildly as you like, but I fear this is not the place *goes off to check threadjacking rules*

I'll keep this brief, if indeed we should be taking this discussion elsewhere. My thoughts were that I was responding to a question in the thread, and that the original topic had petered out anyway.

The speculative account I sketched actually didn't imply that this fetish was an inherited trait. I was suggesting that a certain general sexual psychology was an inherited trait (among humans, taken generally), and that a fetish was a certain pathway along which this sexual psychology could be developed (more likely through environmental factors). Maybe I'd consider the idea that a tendency toward fetishes could be an inherited trait, but that still wouldn't get us to the claim that this particular fetish was an inherited trait.

[Jemmabean]

Speculate away, guys! It is sort of veering off-topic, but it sprung from the original topic at hand, and unless the creator of the thread minds, or unless either of you wants to start a new topic to discuss this, then I don't see why you can't continue the discussion here!

[count tiszula]

Well, personally I am quite happy to believe that there is at least a hereditary component in the fetish, so I am ok with that step. I'm not an expert on evolutionary theory, but as has been suggested above, on the selfish gene theory, it would be advantageous for people to be attracted by something that everyone does and is not confined to those found conventionally attractive, as the genes would theoretically be spread more widely and successfully.

Moreover, it always seems to be forgotten that frequent and violent sneezing is caused by having a very efficient immune system and the ability to get rid of germs and noxious elements; in fact, the sneeziest people are the healthiest and strongest. No wonder they are so attractive.

The only problem is why everyone doesn't have the fetish. Random mutation?

[Vetinari]

Genetically some mutations can occur which have no evolutionary advantage or disadvantage and those tend to exist in a population at a static(ish) level, not dying out because they cause no illness that prevents breeding but not growing because they have no particular advantage.

I'd say any tendency towards fetishness would come under that category, if indeed it is heritable.

[Nevyn]

Ok, lots of interesting ideas... Too much opportunity for speculation, too little time...

lk: If I understand your original post correctly, you're talking at least in part about the human ability to fantasize. I would agree that this is an inherited ability with potential benefits in many areas, not just sexual activity. It's this ability that allows us to deal with desires that may be socially unacceptable (eg coveting thy neighbour's wife) internally and without bothering anyone else. The other mechanism by which we try to stay faithful to our partners and avoid illicit affairs with other potential mates is also something I'd consider a genetically evolved trait, but I don't think it has anything to do with fetishes - it's simply a little thing we like to call love

For our fetishy purposes, the nice thing about fantasy is that it allows us to explore areas of our sexuality which we are unable to put into practice in the "real" world. (This could be due to customs/laws, or because it would be physically impractical, or due to lack of a willing partner, or just because we're too shy.) It also allows some of us to become aroused during sex (eg by fantasizing about our partner sneezing) when we might otherwise find it hard to do so. In this case however I would question whether the fetish is a good thing because it allows us to become aroused, or a bad thing because if we didn't have it we'd get aroused by regular stuff anyway? That said, I don't like attaching "good" and "bad" labels to it. It simply is what it is. But from an evolutionary perspective, I think it needs to be asked.

The question of how/why fetishes are formed is one open to much debate, but most of what I've read and discovered through my own experience and that of others I've talked to is that they occur in people who are less comfortable than most with regular social interaction. This is especially true of males but can apply to both genders. From my own (limited) studies one notable common factor among those with fetishes is an absence (emotional if not physical) of one or both parents during childhood. This suggests that the formation of a fetish is more likely due to environmental than genetic factors. However it should be noted that patterns of behaviour are often passed on from one generation to the next; if your father doesn't ever hug you it might well be because his father never hugged him, etc. Therefore although a fetish tendency is probably not passed down genetically, it might well be done so environmentally. (Thus making the "nature vs nurture" question redundant.)

Of course it might be the case that fetishes are inherited, but I imagine very hard to prove. Anyone who wants to ask the question "Hey Dad, do you get horny when Mum sneezes?" has a far closer relationship with their parents than I do...

*Stops typing now so everyone can go and take a cold shower/stiff drink to get that image out of their heads*

[Jemmabean]

You know what, I think I'm going to ask my dad that when I get back home to Canada. Just for kicks. He'll probably run away screaming in terror, but that's not actually that uncommon a reaction for my parents to have when I ask them questions... I was sort of born without a propriety filter in my head.

[Shelle]

hahahha i would love to hear what your dad says when you ask him!

[lk]

Nevyn's last post is so rich that I fear no response from me can do it justice. I will try not to do it injustice, though.

lk: If I understand your original post correctly, you're talking at least in part about the human ability to fantasize. I would agree that this is an inherited ability with potential benefits in many areas, not just sexual activity. It's this ability that allows us to deal with desires that may be socially unacceptable (eg coveting thy neighbour's wife) internally and without bothering anyone else. The other mechanism by which we try to stay faithful to our partners and avoid illicit affairs with other potential mates is also something I'd consider a genetically evolved trait, but I don't think it has anything to do with fetishes - it's simply a little thing we like to call love

Yes, I was talking about the human ability to fantasize (you would have thought I could put it that simply), and like you say, at least in part. The extra part would be another basic human psychological ability, the ability to form associations. That's important to the explanation of a fetish, because there we're not talking just about having sexual fantasies, but having sexual fantasies associated with something non-sexual.

I like your formulation about dealing with desires that may be socially unacceptable in an internal way. That's what I was thinking about, too, but although our tendency to fantasize may be essentially connected with a social environment in which we are only supposed to act on our sexuality in certain acceptable means, I don't conclude that this tendency is simply one that encourages fidelity, since fantasies can be at work in infidelity, too. For fidelity, love is likely to be a more reliable mechanism...

For our fetishy purposes, the nice thing about fantasy is that it allows us to explore areas of our sexuality which we are unable to put into practice in the "real" world. (This could be due to customs/laws, or because it would be physically impractical, or due to lack of a willing partner, or just because we're too shy.) It also allows some of us to become aroused during sex (eg by fantasizing about our partner sneezing) when we might otherwise find it hard to do so. In this case however I would question whether the fetish is a good thing because it allows us to become aroused, or a bad thing because if we didn't have it we'd get aroused by regular stuff anyway? That said, I don't like attaching "good" and "bad" labels to it. It simply is what it is. But from an evolutionary perspective, I think it needs to be asked.

This seems an especially difficult question to answer. It's hard for me to think about what would be arousing without just thinking about my own responses, and those don't exactly count as a scientifically reliable data set. Even restricting my analysis to my own responses, I have trouble formulating an answer, because I don't have a good way of thinking about how often I would be aroused if I didn't have sneezing to think about. Even if I become aroused by other things, I eventually end up thinking about sneezing in any case.

But my instinct is to answer that its a "good thing" (your hesitation about the labels is entirely appropriate here) because, having this fetish, sneezing is such a reliable method for me; if I didn't have it, I can't imagine what else could be as reliable. Still, even if we just stipulated that this hunch was somehow right as a generalization, it wouldn't settle the evolutionary question, because there might not be a reliable connection between this kind of arousal and procreative sex. Maybe it would allow people having procreative sex to have more of it, but maybe it's more at home just in the realm of fantasy, which might not involve procreative sex.

The question of how/why fetishes are formed is one open to much debate, but most of what I've read and discovered through my own experience and that of others I've talked to is that they occur in people who are less comfortable than most with regular social interaction. This is especially true of males but can apply to both genders. From my own (limited) studies one notable common factor among those with fetishes is an absence (emotional if not physical) of one or both parents during childhood. This suggests that the formation of a fetish is more likely due to environmental than genetic factors. However it should be noted that patterns of behaviour are often passed on from one generation to the next; if your father doesn't ever hug you it might well be because his father never hugged him, etc. Therefore although a fetish tendency is probably not passed down genetically, it might well be done so environmentally. (Thus making the "nature vs nurture" question redundant.)

The last point is very important to remember: if family members share a trait, that could easily be environmental and not genetic.

As for the more general environmental account you sketch here, I tend to agree with that, too. The only concern I would have is that the account is sufficiently general that it is probably true of a wide range of deviations from the norm, both sexual and non-sexual. That doesn't mean the story is in any sense wrong; it's just that I would like to know more about how parental absence, or a particular sort of parental absence, leads to a fetish in particular, and then ideally to this fetish in particular. (I also tend to think a particular sort of parental presence might be important, too, at least in our fetish: a kind of over-monitoring, particularly about illness and/or body functions.) That's asking for a lot, of course, but the kinds of explanations really are hard.

Finally, I want to add something for people who might be puzzled why we are going on about evolutionary explanations if Nevyn and I both believe that fetishes have environmental causes. My answer to that is that even environmentally caused traits have to develop our of the kinds of bodies and minds we have evolved to have; like I said in my first post, you don't have to say that our fetish serves an evolutionary purpose, but if you don't, you then want to explain the evolutionary purposes that were served by our being the kinds of organisms who can develop fetishes, with the right sort of environmental triggers.

[Vetinari]

you don't have to say that our fetish serves an evolutionary purpose, but if you don't, you then want to explain the evolutionary purposes that were served by our being the kinds of organisms who can develop fetishes, with the right sort of environmental triggers.

All kinds of traits exist that have no evolutionary advantage or disadvantage as I explained above. Furthermore, traits which have no innate advantage or disadvantage can become more common if, for example, they are physically close to another trait which does have an advantage or disadvantage on the DNA strand.

[Nevyn]

As for the more general environmental account you sketch here, I tend to agree with that, too. The only concern I would have is that the account is sufficiently general that it is probably true of a wide range of deviations from the norm, both sexual and non-sexual. That doesn't mean the story is in any sense wrong; it's just that I would like to know more about how parental absence, or a particular sort of parental absence, leads to a fetish in particular, and then ideally to this fetish in particular. (I also tend to think a particular sort of parental presence might be important, too, at least in our fetish: a kind of over-monitoring, particularly about illness and/or body functions.) That's asking for a lot, of course, but the kinds of explanations really are hard.

I strongly suspect that my theory applies to any fetish, not just sneezing. If a parent is emotionally unavailable, or even if parents do not demonstrate any affection for one another, it could inhibit the formation of a healthy model of intimacy for a child in relation to one or both genders. This is what I'm suggesting could make the child more likely to develop a fetish of some kind. The specifics of the fetish are quite possibly random; we happen to fixate on sneezing because perhaps we were given a lot of attention when we sneezed, or maybe we just happened to be feeling something pleasurable at an early point in development when someone nearby sneezed, and we formed a connection.

In fact I also suspect that a great many people have minor versions of fetishes, but they're simply things the person happens to like; minor turn-ons as opposed to actual fetishes. For those of us who did experience the kind of factors we're discussing here those turn-ons go on to develop into a full-blown fetish; something that becomes necessary rather than just fun.

lk, I like your idea above that over-fussy parenting could also be a factor, this makes a lot of sense to me.

Other related wild speculations: (just throwing these out there to see what anyone might think)

Almost all fetishes involve things that are experienced at a very early age; eg various bodily functions, specific textures, physical sensations such as being restrained, tickled or even spanked. To me this also supports the idea that a fetish, or at least the basis for one, is formed in early infancy.

Many fetishes involve some degree of vulnerability or helplessness, which to me seems a key element. Perhaps some of us find it easier to experience desire when the object of our desire is helpless and unlikely to reject us. Conversely perhaps some of us are only able to let down our emotional barriers when we ourselves are physically helpless.

I've often wondered why many straight female fetishists also like female sneezes but the same is seldom true of males. Maybe it could be because the primary caregivers for an infant are much more likely to be female (mothers, aunts, female nurses and/or babysitters are more likely to be involved and for greater periods of time than their male counterparts), and so we are simply more likely to experience female sneezing during our early development.