Talk:Breast fetishism

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Breast fetishism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081217154132/http://www.wlpcomics.com/wiki/index.php?title=The_Magnificent_Milkmaid to http://www.wlpcomics.com/wiki/index.php?title=The_Magnificent_Milkmaid

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:37, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Normal? Atypical? Partialism or Non-Partialism? Confusion.
I'd like to call into question whether the article is properly focused. The article starts out by asserting that the article's topic and title refer specifically to the paraphilic variant of breast fetishism, noting that it is "atypical". However it immediately notes that the same terminology can be used to describe the opposite, non-paraphilic attraction to breasts. This creates significant confusion about the assertive tone of the first sentence.

This confusion is amplified by the fact that half of the entire article is devoted to the non-paraphilic form of breast attraction. If the article focuses on both aspects equally, then there should not be an assertion one way or the other unless it is clearly stated that it is an opinion that is commonly held or otherwise significant. This all culminates in one of the most confusing and uninformative sentences I've ever read on Wikipedia, "Sexual attraction to breasts is considered normal unless it is highly atypical and is therefore a form of partialism." I think that there are much better ways to include a link to the article on partialism than with a tautological statement.

I also want to call attention to the article on paraphilia, which states in the second paragraph: "no consensus has been found for any precise border between unusual sexual interests and paraphilic ones." Considering that even the article on paraphilia itself does not try to make a clear distinction between paraphilic and non-paraphilic interests, I think that an article which only mentions paraphilia should tread on this subject more lightly.

I suggest that the article be revised to say that "Breast Fetishism" can refer to both paraphilic and non-paraphilic interests, mention that if considered a paraphilic interest it would fall under the category of partialism, and then avoid drawing a fine line or making any assertions after that. It may also be worth noting explicitly that there is no precise border between the two, as is noted in the paraphilia article. I also think that anyone who takes the time to edit this should consider the connotations that the word "atypical" holds. Because of the lack of a clear focus on paraphilic or non-paraphilic breast fetishism throughout the article, use of "atypical" can easily be misunderstood to mean that all human interest in breasts is abnormal or unusual, which the article states multiple times is clearly not the case.

108.48.181.200 (talk) 18:37, 5 May 2020 (UTC)


 * The lead of the Paraphilia article currently stating that "no consensus has been found for any precise border between unusual sexual interests and paraphilic ones" doesn't mean that the Paraphilia article "does not try to make a clear distinction between paraphilic and non-paraphilic interests." The Paraphilia article clearly defines and goes over what paraphilic interests are (while also noting debate on the matter). There actually is no "try to." There are sexual interests that have been deemed paraphilias by medical authorities. A keyword in the aforementioned lead sentence is "precise", and it's comparing "unusual sexual interests and paraphilic ones", as to state that distinguishing the two is not always precise. After all, paraphilias are unusual (atypical) sexual interests. This is why criteria are in place to categorize paraphilias. Considering the synonym status of "unusual/atypical sexual interest" and "paraphilia", that sentence in the Paraphilia article should probably be removed, or at least reworded. The Kink (sexuality) article, which is where "unusual sexual interests" redirects to, needs tweaking or merging.


 * As "for avoid drawing a fine line or making any assertions after that", look at the archives. It's been important to spell out what breast fetishism in the paraphilic sense as to make it clear to readers that sexual attraction to breasts is not automatically paraphilic. So, yes, we should retain "a highly atypical sexual interest" and "unless it is highly atypical." Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 20:50, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Leading Paragraph fails to meet definition of fetish.
As a paraphilia, breast fetishism (also known as mastofact, breast partialism, or mazophilia) is a sexual interest that focuses exclusively on the female breasts, and is a type of partialism. The term breast fetishism is also used in the non-paraphilic sense, to refer to cultural attention to female breasts and the sexuality they represent

fet·ish

noun

fetish (noun) · fetishes (plural noun)


 * 1) a form of sexual desire in which gratification is strongly linked to a particular object or activity or a part of the body other than the sexual organs: "a man with a fetish for surgical masks" · "a foot fetish"  an excessive and irrational devotion or commitment to a particular thing: "he had a fetish for writing more opinions each year than any other justice"
 * 2) an inanimate object worshiped for its supposed magical powers or because it is considered to be inhabited by a spirit.

Mis-characterizing sexual attraction to breasts or non-paraphilic cultural norms pertaining to breasts as a fetish with no credible source. shiznaw (talk) 16:13, 24 March 2024 (UTC)