Talk:Clothing fetish/Archive 1

citation needed
"Glove fetishism is a sexual fetish where an individual is obsessed and fixated by another or oneself wearing gloves on their hands." demanding a citation for things like that is like demanding citation for "apples grow on trees" look up "fetish" or "fetishism" in your favourite dictionary. the only questionable thing is if glove fetishists actually exist —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.32.122.59 (talk) 21:02, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Umbrella article
I've created this new article to house all of the previous clothing fetish articles that were original research or had no attribution to reliable sources. If there were any garment fetish article that did support sources then I've left a blurb here and a link to their main article. The exception is the "leather fetish" blurb which I've linked to the Leather subculture article. I'm hoping to add more sources as I go but I'm going to need help. I figured that with the sources I had combined with bare minimum prectically dicdef paragraphs for unsourced material that this would be okay until some editors more familiar editors can get in here and source this stuff. Of course as sources emerge recreating articles when they get to "Start" class quality would be the best plan. NeoFreak 15:12, 1 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Seems a good idea, though we should be careful of suggesting that "Garment fetishism" is an accepted/notable term, rather, it's that we're just grouping them here for convenience. Mdwh 16:15, 1 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I was worried about WP:SYN or WP:OR in the title as well. It really does seem like the most appropriate term though. If there are any other ideas for a title change I'm all ears. NeoFreak 16:24, 1 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Would a better title be Types of garment fetishism? Robotman1974 20:09, 1 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Well along that train of thought I'd say "list" of Garment feishes. It still uses the "Garment fetish" title though so I'm not really sure how that would solve the OR-ish nature of the term. I'm starting to think that the title is alright as long as no assertions are made about GF without sources. NeoFreak 20:44, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Sections to review
I'm looking at the garment types listed. It contains gems such as:


 * "Gloves: Glove fetishism is a sexual fetish where an individual is obsessed and fixated by another or oneself wearing gloves on their hands."


 * "Socks: Sock fetishism is a sexual fetish relating to socks. Sock fetishists are sexually attracted by wearing socks, partners wearing socks, pictures concerning it, or the object itself."

Unless there is evidence these are not tiny minority, or there is actually notable content to provide about them beyond that they exist, then can we instead just include one sentence, along the lines of "minor garment fetishes concerning socks,[CITE] gloves,[CITE] and jackets,[CITE]  also exist. In such cases often the fabric, color, or scent is significant."

FT2 (Talk 16:19, 7 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Agreed. NeoFreak 18:28, 7 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm removing sections without sources indicating that they are un-fringe. - brenneman  07:06, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Public schools
"This is sometimes described as a Catholic school uniform, though in the United Kingdom it is also worn in most public and private schools". This sentence is a bit confusing - does it mean "public schools" in the British English sense of the term or in the American English sense? -86.142.109.209 23:28, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Dead Link
3rd reference namely

Scorolli C, Ghirlanda S, Enquist M, Zattoni S, Jannini E A (2007). Relative prevalence of different fetishes. International Journal of Impotence Researchadvance online publication 15 February 2007.

does not take us anywhere. Let us either remove the hyperlink or update it. Please suggest.Anil1956 (talk) 20:08, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I really do fail to see why anyone wating to wear any kind of girls clothing is or can be considered pronografic but then maybe it takes all kinds to see it nay other way really but if you really do look at it correctly wearing any kinds of cloths is really nothing at all cloths are cloths so what does it really matter what kind of cloths anyone wears i think anyone should be allowed to wear nay kind of cloths they really do want to wear be it males and or females i can eleborate on this much further if need be!

Thank you Jay! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eleventhdr (talk • contribs) 15:47, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure which part of the article you disagree with? This (and transvestic fetishism which you also commented on) is about wearing certain types of clothes as a _fetish_. Wearing certain types of clothes isn't necessarily - and obviously usually isn't - a fetish, but it can be. Mdwh (talk) 00:27, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Merge with "Fetish Fashion"
..it's more than sensible to assume that the fetish for garments and "fetish fashion" are co-dependencies, inseparable in their origins and participants. A merger would provide a decent reflection of context and history of fetishized clothing objects and their corresponding fashions. Redblueball (talk) 12:21, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Garment Fetish and Fetish Fashion are distinctly different. For example, take a fetish fashion item like the basque which may be worn as a fetish item, but the wearer may not be sexually aroused by the basque itself.  Now look at a snorkel parka.  In no way could this be regarded as an item of fetish fashion, but somebody who has a jacket fetish would find the parka arousing.  The difference is that there are numerous garment fetishes where the garment may not be a fashion item. 82.38.137.32 (talk) 18:26, 10 January 2008 (UTC)


 * If the wearer of the basque is not sexually aroused by the garment or does not allude to the idea that sexual qualities belong to garments (a sign of sexual fetishism), then how is it being correctly labelled as an object of fetish fashion?.. is this "fetish fashion" just a mirroring gesture lacking fetishistic authenticity? Redblueball (talk) 17:42, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


 * You seem to have missed the point that garments that are in the fetish fashion category are "popular" so "fashionable" and would be recognised for what they are by a large percentage of the population. When anybody wears an item of fetish fashion they are blatantly advertising their sexuality.  For example, the majority of people would recognise a basque as an item of fetish fashion.  Fetish fashion is also often garments designed and worn specifically for the purpose of advertising their sexuality, where as an item that's the subject of a garment fetish may be an every day item; few people would think it kinky to wear socks!  For garment fetishism, the item does not need to be fashionable and in many cases may be the exact opposite; few people if any would call school uniform fashionable.  Just look at the garments in this section, gloves, socks, stockings, sweaters, school uniforms, underwear, leotards; most if not all would not be considered fashionable.  So if the garments that are the object of the fetish in garment fetishism are very often not fashionable, how could this section be merged with fetish fashion? 82.38.137.32 (talk) 21:53, 16 January 2008 (UTC)


 * The term "fetish" is applied to the term "fashion" to imply a relationship between fetishism for garments (known to anthropology and psychology) and post 1980s fashion. "Fetish fashion" is dependant on a form of garment fetishism or other "fetishism" for its meaning.. without some kind of allusion to a fetish for garments - garments cannot be appropriated to a fashion for the manners of fetishism. Redblueball (talk) 14:12, 19 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Garment Fetishism and "Fetish Fashion" are not the same. For instance, in the gay / bondage community wearing a heavy chain and padlock round your neck would be considered Fetish Fashion, but in no way is it a garment.  Fetish Fashion is a very broad subject, of which Garment Fetishism is a distinct aspect and therefore deserves its own page.  Would you for instance suggest that Kindergarten and University were merged into one article on Education?  I think not, they are distinct in their own right as are Garment Fetishism and Fetish Fashion. Spuggie (talk) 20:23, 10 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Perhaps, the padlock is similar in that it is worn for fashionable affect, like say - a hat, or a particular pair of socks, while also alluding to the fashion for fetishism. I dare say, that fetish fashion arrived from Freud's descriptions of patients being attracted to inanimate objects, like padlocks, hats, socks etc, and is thus an exploitation (or expression) of this perceived arena.


 * If fetish fashion is distinct from this fetish for garments, then what is it about?... the article on fetish fashion simply names garments that are suitable, and claims that any abnormal garment from any time since 1700 - qualifies as a source of fetish fashion. This appears (to me) as an invention of recent history... an article which discounts the impact of fetishism created by Freud, and discounts the comodification of subcultures (and their fashions) in the 1980s. Redblueball (talk) 19:40, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Glasses?
I came here from the Meganekko page to learn more about Glasses fetishism, but that section of the article does not seem to be here. :C --99.177.217.42 (talk) 23:59, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Methinks it's because the term "Meganekko" is culturally bound. At least that's what the definition says. I could be wrong. --Animeronin (talk) 15:58, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe culturally bound to otaku. It only applies to those who know what moe is...Pressondude (talk) 00:08, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Back closure fetish?
I came here from the Back_closure_fetish page, but this page doesn't seem to discuss this subject. Anniepoo (talk) 04:08, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

fancruft? yes, but necessarily so
This article appears to be a merge of many more-specific articles on particular fetishes. Should we split it into separate articles again? or acknowledge that individual fetishes are all necessarily very specific to a limited readership? -- BukakiKid (talk) 18:31, 23 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Let's leave it in one piece for now, because some of them have very limited readership. The article needs some copyediting though. --Qsaw (talk) 18:31, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * However, it would be good to split the uniform fetish section into an separate article, and leave basic information here, since there is enough content for an self-standing article, which has accumulated over time. --Qsaw (talk) 13:13, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. --Qsaw (talk) 14:46, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Leather straps
I just undid an undo of a mod to say the majority of bondage equipment is made of leather straps. certainly not all bondage equipment is made of leather straps (handcuffs aren't), so common sense demands the 'majority of'. might make sense to say 'often', or 'much'. Anniepoo (talk) 04:52, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * It is certainly true that all bondage equipment is not made of leather straps. However, it is not a given that a majority of bondage equipment is made of leather straps either, which is what my edit was trying to convey.  I'll make another attempt at this, but my opinion is that we still need a citation for this sentence. Valrith (talk) 11:03, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Any photos of men?
I think this article would be more complete and educational if there was at least one photo of a man along with all of these photos of women. Men are a large part of the clothing fetish culture. At the very least, it's likely possible to find a historical photo or artwork depicting this fetish in men. Newjerseyliz (talk) 10:30, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

I can respond with pictures of myself in my clear plastic clothing
Folks: I have a fetish in clear plastic clothing including clear plastic raincoat and clear plastic raincoats with lights in them. If you live in Bellingham, Washington, you can see me out and about in my lighted clear plastic clothing. Is it appropriate to add a paragraph and a picture or two of my clear plastic clothing? You can see my existing pictures on line at www.clearplastic.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allyn (talk • contribs) 00:24, 30 August 2016 (UTC)