https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmaNwDNAv7I

They have a long history of getting messy on their channel.

10/10 dress, if only there had been more coverage

Nice, also demonstrates to a lot of Wammers that people like this do not see it as a fetish at all, and have vids involving their young kids.

Then he's a sick f**k for involving his children.

Excellent video, perfect editing, and having lots of clearly genuine fun doing it.

Just because he involves his kids doesn't mean he is a sick f**k. Why shouldn't it be just for the comedy value?
Get some proof before you accuse someone. Not everyone like us do it as a fetish.

I think JohnnyPie was saying in the event that he is one of us, then he is a sick fuck for involving the kids. Not necessarily that he absolutely is one of us.

On that note, I think I should mention how this community severely over estimates how many others out there are wammers. There are sororities and fraternities who have pie in the face fundraisers every year, do we think that's all wammers? Or wammers driving that tradition? Do we think the 3 stooges were definitely wammers because they often incorporated pies/cakes in the face in their gags? I could keep going but all I'll say to keep this short is remember The Man, The Wife has found so many willing and eager models just in their somewhat immediate circle to participate in their incredible videos. But you'll also notice that, at least to my knowledge, they haven't had even one model say they actually find fetish level pleasure in this. Even some of their most notable models who love it the most, Lily, Ellie, Stephanie recently, find it just very fun at most.

Agreed. The amount of people engaged in some kind of fun, pie-in-the-face activity is easily 100 times (1000 times? A million times?) more than the people who have an *actual* WAM fetish.

So it stands to reason that 98% of the mainstream pie clips you see on TikTok or YT are... made by non-WAMmers. To the point where I can almost always spot the occasional ones where the guy (yeah, it's always the guy) is an actual WAMmer. I don't think that's the case here, but TBH I haven't followed their content too closely.

Some other instances where pie/messy content definitely isn't coming from WAMmers:
--Church groups (they LOVE pie contests for some reason)
--Sororities/fraternties
--Mascots (Blue, Clutch, etc)
--Female TV stars
--Female movie stars
--Female pop stars (although I'm starting to wonder about ol' Katy)

Also, Charlie Chaplin was apparently an early WAMmer. Not sure about any other male actors in the pie business though. (I have a theory that Soupy Sales might've been a gay WAMmer, but no actual factual evidence beyond him creating scenarios where he always got pied and/or pied other men. But zero women. Again, no actual proof. Just a theory.)

And of course, as I've mentioned before, none of the models I ever worked with treated it like a fetish. Even the ones who were "into it." At best, they found it really fun and enjoyable, or liked the experience or the textures and tastes. No sexual component whatsoever. I suspect that's true of, well.... Most female WAM models over the years......

Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.

In regards to the messages about messy content and for fun vs into the fetish:

- the comment about TMaTW's models makes me wonder who's into it from the other producers vs who's just doing it for fun or for the extra cash.

- regarding Greek life - Yahoo Answers back in the day had a ton of posts that were all in the vein of "we have winter formal coming up and there will be games where if you lose you get slimed, should I risk my makeup hair and gown for a game?" My alma mater in the U.S. definitely did not have that, so I'm wondering whether this is a think in the UK or if someone was getting off to some sort of fantasy?

It's easy to forget that WAM is actually quite obscure and our shared conception of it (even to many a fully briefed and initiated model) frequently remains utterly baffling.

For most, the concept of messiness as game playing or forfeit is genuinely viewed as the epitome of innocent comedy fun and as far away from any constructions about sex and masturbation as could possibly be (hence being the quite un-ironic choice of church groups)

Imagine, if you will, that there could be a community of people who are sexually aroused by difficult jigsaws. Sounds ridiculous, doesn't it? So it follows that most people's engagement with a 10,000 piecer is going to be on the level.

No secret signalling. No a gateways to sexy subjugation. No "My god! The clouds and foliage in that puzzle are sexy as fuck and they're not even at the edges!"

So, in a way, that's the real danger when we bring content in from the outside, place our own constructions on it and sit it alongside posts about paid pudding covered models worshipping arses and eating pussies.

Let's be careful. Both about what we bring in and take out of here!

They always edge the puzzles for the first 500 pieces. You can't tell me that's a coincidence.

Also, I agree. This is completely innocent to the vast majority of people. A random person thinking it looks fun or wanting a pie in the face almost certainly is not getting aroused or aware that others might. Don't fetish mine, don't involve people without informed consent.

I've got a friend who mentioned they would love to do the first Taskmaster task where you've got to eat as much watermelon as you can as a birthday party game. I think that is a brilliant idea. Unfortunately, it would not be appropriate for me to make that happen even though, as a form of WAM, it'd be a bit shite so it wouldn't be arousing at all. It is still too close for comfort.

That same friend also mentioned wanting a pie in the face before. Two hints at WAM?! Clearly a fetish! It's more likely that they just think it would be innocent fun. Innocent fun that would not be innocent for me so not compatible.

I mean, Katy Perry has gotten messy in every way you can imagine. But, I don't think she sees it as anything other than goofy fun. I doubt she's up late at night ordering the latest Slapstick Stuff clips.

I would never tell!!

A good friend of mine has run into her a couple times tho. (They live in the same town.) I have an imaginary scenario where I meet her and a flash of recognition crosses her face and I go, "A-HAAAA!!!"

Correct. First, lets agree that a fetish is something that turns you on sexually. So what I was saying is that "if" this guy is "one of us" meaning he's sexually aroused by WAM and involves his young children then he's a sick fuck.

But he's not. As pointed out, far too many people see people engaging in WAM plan and default to "they're a Wammer." They are likely not. Much like the video, they simply think it's fun. Let's say I told everyone here I had a sock fetish and jacked off to girls taking socks on and off. Then you found my Youtube channel and it's videos of my two little girls taking their socks on and off. You'd think "someone needs to call child protective services."

Per Rich's post, I have shot WAM with countless models. While most of them had fun, not one of them was sexually aroused by it.

How obscure is WAM? So obscure that too many shows to name featured kids getting Wammed; pied, slimed without a peep. No public outrage, no nothing. If you told 100 girls that you jack off to girls getting pied or slime, all 100 would think "what in the living fuck is wrong with you."

My two cents on this:

Cent 1: it's funny, I was reading a thread about the decline of college football bowl games on the CFB subreddit and someone mentioned that the winning coach of the Duke's Mayo bowl gets mayo poured on them. I nearly made a comment about how I'm surprised that there's not a bowl game sponsored by a certain channel where the winning coach gets slimed, especially considering how seemingly everyone wanted to it to happen to them growing up, but I would definitely have come across as weird. Also, ironically, I had zero desire to get slimed growing up.

Cent 2: Assuming the telling girls about the kink is as a romantic partner, while I think the negative reactions would outweigh the positives, I'd also like to think that any partner worth their salt would be fine with it even if they're not into it themselves. Like my fiance isn't into it whatsoever, but she absolutely could care less about me being into it.

"I'd also like to think that any partner worth their salt would be fine with it even if they're not into it themselves."

Well I can't disagree with that statement enough. No girl who dates you, and forms a deeper romantic relationship is under any obligation to indulge your WAM fetish. And if that's a requirement, I'd reach out for therapy.

What's this about Charlie Chaplin being a WAMmer?

1. Ive been aware of this channel for years and never posted it publicly on here because....well weirdos gonna be weird and post creepy stuff and scare them.
2. I have shared some of these clips with producers to show what good pie smearing looks like when one person WANTS to pie the other and it's not just robo pieing.
3. Not everybody with a pie fetish feels the same way about everything when they see a vid. I personally don't care who or what else is in the scene because I'm focused on the pretty of age woman getting pied, I don't even register who or what is going on in the background or worry or think about how old anybody is. That is because for the majority of my time on this earth you were just good with seeing the girl get pied and it didn't matter what kind of show it was.
I assume that there are people out there like me that can separate innocent fun with your family and fetish play with your wife/girlfriend.
It goes without saying if someone is getting turned on by kids being involved, you are sick.

Maybe I wasn't specific enough, but the bit about my fiance covers that.

I wouldn't want my fiance to feel obligated to indulge. I mean more so, for anything that's not dangerous illegal, a good partner would be like "I'm not into WAM/BDSM/other kinky thing, but I don't care if you buy scenes/jerk off to it, as long as you don't involve me." And that's also another discussion.