I'm assuming it's just a random neural pathway. A result of neuro-plasticity

How fortunate we are to have something so innocuous

Rave on, lovers

About 20 years ago right before we launched WLP an old friend of mine who has written books on psychology, psychotherapy and speaks regularly at medical conferences and I were having dinner. And we were close enough friends where I could ask her about the WAM kink/fetish.

She said..."That's it? Come back to me IF you have a REAL problem." She said the old cliche is true...i.e..we think about sex all the time....and most people have SOME sort of kink/fetish.
The only "problem" that arises (male pun intended) is if that kink/fetish starts to interfere negatively in our daily lives. And she's right. If you spend all your money on WAM videos and can't afford to pay your electric bill, you have a problem.

If you can't have relationships with people because you are pre-occupied with WAM that too is a problem.

So, no studies specifically that I know of, but her explanation seemed pretty logical to me.

Robby
WAMma Lamma Pie
www.wammalamapie.com

www.shepiestheguy.com

www.freudsayswhat.com

Yes, in fact there is quite the literature on fetishes.

Right now, I believe the standard theory of the development of sexual fetishes are that as a child, you see/hear something at the same time as getting a erection. During sexual maturity, this coincidence morphs into sexual fetishism.

This is a book that I will never not plug here, because it's so relevant. I read it, and it helped me come to terms with my own deviation.

https://www.amazon.com/Perv-Sexual-Deviant-All-Us/dp/0374230897

There is also an idea for an experiment that I would love to run, which I got an idea from a section in this book.

So, you've got two groups - experiment and control - of people who are into to gunge.

Your control group is people who are into gunge, and enjoy receiving, who are secluded for 30 minutes, so they can do random things.

Your control group is people who are into gunge, and enjoy receiving, who are instructed to masturbate and reach climax in the same 30 minutes.

Then, you get the two groups together, and have a nice gunge session. My hypothesis is that the group who had previously masturbated would enjoy the session less than the group who hadn't. Because the experimental group had masturbated, they weren't getting the same level of sexual satisfaction from the same experience. The book delves in to why.

Also, this covers two of my favorite things - gunge and human experimentation.

Speak for yourself, bucko!

Relationships with other people are overrated. (For that matter, so is electricity.)

Ok, but what about women?

So back in 1975 my parents just picked a really inopportune time to watch MAUDE?!? Goddammit.

I wonder that also. Maybe female sexuality isn't studied as well, for a variety of reasons.

This book may have more information, but I haven't read it, I just know about it.

https://www.amazon.com/Bonk-Curious-Coupling-Science-Sex-ebook/dp/B003M5IGE2/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=

Any advice on searching for books about sexology without Google thinking you're a total creep?

Yep.

The book talks about the theory in regards to a case of someone who has a fetish for amputees. His mother had a friend who was an amputee, and at a very inopportune moment, he looked at the stump leg.

Why couldn't I have looked at a stuuuuuuuuuuuuuump????

For legitimate peer reviewed studies and not just books by "professionals" looking to capitalize off trends you would need to search pubmed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed

Searching "kink" doesn't come up with much, "fetish" is more of an actual scientific term and gives you some interesting results: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=fetish

Woman here. Got into it in that exact way- learned to masturbate young, and 90's Nickelodeon was always on in the background. And now I'm in my 30's getting off from the thought of getting pied and slimed.

"Sexual Variations: Fetishism, Sadomasochism and Transvestism" by Chris Gosselin, published 1980 after huuge amounts of research; still available on Amazon.
I chatted with him several times in the 70's, and on one occasion we were discussing the gender imbalance in kinks. He said that to brutally precis a lot of his research '98% of men are kinky, the other 2% are liars: 2% of women are kinky, the other 98% are liars'.
Many women had been interviewed by him and denied any turn-ons; re-interviewed under hypnosis or truth drugs they had opened up about what got them going, but later denied it despite the evidence on tape.
I believe the percentages in women have 'improved' and are still doing so due to changing social expectations, the advent of the internet, etc but are still nowhere near on a par with men.

"Truth drugs?" Hypnosis? What nonsense. The sexuality of women was often downplayed in the past, ancillary to the sexuality of men. 40 year old research on these topics are probably mostly worthless.

On the topic, I recall reading a while ago about an animal study inducing fetishistic urges in rats. Fascinating stuff, here's a brief overview of it: https://www.lehmiller.com/blog/2015/1/16/rats-with-jacket-fetishes-what-animal-sex-studies-reveal-about-the-origin-of-unusual-sexual-interests

And you guys thought Regis was the only perverted rat you were ever going to run into.

There's a lot to suggest that various fetishes emerge as the developing brain's way of neutralising something it otherwise finds overwhelmingly frightening - think about how the most common fetishes are based around bondage, pain, dominance/humiliation/loss of control etc. I've certainly spoken with wammers who say that as small children, gunge on TV used to make them upset/frightened... until something in them changed.

I agree with Mike/Chris Gosselin on the gender split. Paraphilias are an essentially male phenomenon, with only a small minority of women experiencing something analogous. The women that do get into kink tend to have a much more flexible, curious and fun approach to it (precisely because they don't have a hardwired paraphilia and are more interested in exploring their sexuality), whereas kinky men tend to fixate on the one particular thing that gets them off.

That "rats wearing jackets" thing is crazy and I'm not sure it directly equates to fetishes in humans...

Well, if I had a million dollars for every woman I've known with a pair of handcuffs in her dresser drawer (or usually, in her bed night stand drawer)...I'd have 4 million dollars!

One does NOT need to get an erection (or become sexually aroused) when, as a child/youth (pre-pubescent) one first encounters a (future) fetish object or scene...all that is required is visual stimulation (known as 'attentional capture') and a minimum level of 'excitement' (laughter, shock, amazement, vicarious humiliation, etc.) which is later -- sometimes by chance -- coupled with (i.e., a random visualization or recall of the scene) one's sexual 'arousal' (accidental self-arousal, masturbation; either of these will do)...and voila!...zee fetish is born!

Most "researchers' into human sexuality deal with kinks/fetishes either from a survey 9statistical0 approach, or, as a 'abnormality' (sexual pathology)...I have seldom read ANYTHING on the topic of fetishes (or fetish-related behaviors) that accurately decried the process by which one develops a fetish.Years of careful. honest, self-reflection and non-embellished recall memory have led me to my current viewpoint on fetish development.

I remember a local contest where people had to find objects hidden deep in a large amount of jello. Some people dove in simply to find the object and with no care about the mess. Others had a sort of gross reaction while others seemed to enjoy it. Two young ladies suddenly appeared near me and looked over at the scene. One immediately stiffened up and said, 'ewwww', while her friend seemed to arch her body a bit towards the area and went 'Ooooo'. So what makes two people of the same age and gender react opposite to one another? I agree that this 'wiring' must happen when very young. I myself love the polymers and long-chain liquid goo, since that is what I am made out of.

I think the impression is a chicken/egg thing. I have a distinctive memory of being somewhere around 5, 6, 7 at the latest, playing with the next-door neighbor on her porch during a torrential summer downpour. Two sisters from down the street who were some of my regular babysitters came walking up the street splashing in the roaring gutters. It was the early 70's, and they were in faded flare leg jeans and tank tops. I stood there watching them until they disappeared around the bend at the top of the street. And I recall having a erection in my tiny peen long before I had any idea what that meant. Now based on some of the entries above, the visual during my first erection made an impression and I was bonded for life, like a duckling who sees his mother when he first comes out of the egg. But my perspective on a memory from 45 years ago, it seems more likely that there's something more hardwired into me, and it was the sight of something arousing that aroused me, not something that I saw when aroused continues to do so.

Hmmm ... Only one of them noticed your humongous woody?

(Did I get it right?!)

The Journal of Bare-Breasted Bea Arthurs is not peer-reviewed.