>>21467680>posts part of a dictionary entry & leaves out all the bits which prove him wrong Look up the way the word is used in the real world. The object in question is something non-sexual & typically the fetishist cannot become aroused or climax without the fetish present.
The whole point is a fetish is an abnormality. Being attracted to half naked girls in pajamas, yoga pants & sweat pants which were designed to be sexy is not a fetish, it’s a taste. A predilection. In the same way the guys in the redhead/ginger threads are also misusing the term. Being into only one color hair (or simply finding one type particularly attractive) is just a thing you’re into, it isn’t a fetish.
A fetish is getting off on having a woman in heels walk on you, getting beaten with a spatula. The scent of chocolate chip cookies baking. Something most people would not associate with arousal.
Fetishes make people interesting. Being into this thread makes you a het male.
Now, I realize, language changes over time. “Literally” now means figuratively because young people are too retarded to speak correctly. I realize if enough people start using “fetish” in this much broader, less useful way, the word will come to have this new meaning.
But the users of /s/ do not constitute a sufficiently meaningful enough mainstream demographic to drive this kind of evolution of language, you’re just a bunch of sheltered kids misusing a word to make your suburban upbringing seem more edgy.
You like seeing your older sisters friends at a sleep over. We get it. It doesn’t make you a fetishist.
>>21471870Impressive rejoinder, sir!
