Date: August 15 2017 3:43 AM Title: Reasons of Macrophilia
nice
https://www.google.com.pk/
Date: March 10 2016 8:45 PM Title: Reasons of Macrophilia
If you are looking for IRL giantess, VR is your best bet. Some people are already creating this content. If you want to see some check out Bryce who runs Runnuggyproductions over on giantesslove. Here's his demo on YouTube where you can pan in 360 or use your headset:
http://youtu.be/xf-lKNmBl0c
Date: March 10 2016 8:04 PM Title: Reasons of Macrophilia
The most feasible way could be through VR or virtual reality where the users believe they are in a virtual setting and that would allow for giants or shrunken people to exist. It wouldn't be real but its the best we can do unless we discover a race of giant humanoid aliens out there.
Author's Response:
i feel like VR is too...virtual. But I gues it's the most realistic choice we have now. maybe it will even come out in this generation
Date: March 10 2016 5:18 PM Title: Reasons of Macrophilia
Did I say scientific details? I meant practical details of IRL giantess's.
Date: March 10 2016 5:17 PM Title: Giantess IRL?
OK, I'm slightly more knowlagable about these kinds of things, so I'll try to explain some of the scientific details.
As far as we understand the universe, growing a person or shrinking a person should be physically impossible, thanks to the square-cube law. I won't get into the details about the square cube-law, you can look that up fairly easily. Just understand, that as far as we can understand the universe, growing or shrinking someone should be impossible.
Ofcourse, it IS vaguely possible, that we're mistaken about the universe in JUST the right sort of way as to allow growing/shrinking to be possible. But please don't count on this, except for storytelling purpouses.
Ofcourse, that suggestion about building an "Artificial giantess" was interesting. Though I have to ask, why an artificial intelligence? Why not just have it piloted remotely by an actual girl. However, the world will probably have to mature a LOT in order for us to get to the point where we can invest so much resources in one of the lesser known(?) fetishes. Concider looking into cryonics if you want to be cryopreserved and revived into a future where this is possible and plausible.
However, I beleive the most likely way for us to experiance our fetish in the future, is a simulation. Look at the occulus rift, we have the sight and sound part already simulatable. Though taste, touch, and smell will obviously be much harder to simulate, pherhaps at some point in the future we'll find a way.
Once we come up with a way to simulate all five of the senses, it may be possible to build a tiny android, and have it's senses relayed to you through the simulation. Again, if you REALLY REALLY REALLY want this, concider signing up for cryonics, which will preserve your body when you die, to be revived in a brighter future (hopefully one with some sweet giantess action).
In the meantime, I'll just stick to fantasies, which I imagine feel a lot better then the experiance of ACTUALLY being swallowed anyways.
Author's Response:
Thanks for your sciency stuff. I would never be able to know this lol.
If a real girl was hooked up to a robot, do you think it's possible for her to be able to feel everything the robot is supposed to feel? I guess with a bunch of science it's possible...
I would love to get squeezed between boobs in real life though, just more perferable than getting eaten.
Date: March 10 2016 4:40 PM Title: Giantess IRL?
As far as humanity knows, giantesseses aren't exactly feasible. Those who live with giantism typically have a myriad of health problems, as do people with dwarfism. That said, giantesses would break the laws of physics as we know them, such as the square-cubed law, which basically states that as height increases, so does density. Eventually you would become so dense your lungs would be unable to expand against your diaphragm and you'd suffocate (or something along those lines). I believe there's a story on this site called "Helena's Glorious Plan" which elaborates on exactly that. Same goes for shrinking. They'd have to eat constantly or else they'd run the risk of freezing to death. CURSE YOU, PHYSICS!
Author's Response:
ikr. physics is really annoying to people with fantasies DDDD: That's why I thought the robot idea was better.
Date: March 10 2016 7:51 AM Title: Reasons of Macrophilia
No, mate, I disagree with your approach based on dominance. It's not the thing, in my case, and I'm 1000% sure about it.
There's also another thing. For example, despite being an hetero male myself, I'm very much into F/f stuff in this fantasy, I like it more than F/m to be honest, because I find it much more sensual
Author's Response:
You're probably 10000000% right about yourself, because its...yourself. I concentrated on F/m because that's the mainstream thing and what I am into.
[Report This]Date: February 12 2016 4:38 PM Title: Reasons of Macrophilia
You have presented an interesting viewpoint here. And it may well be so.
But being a follower of Celtic thought and philosophy, I believe in the Mother Goddess and her philosophy. I think that many Macrophiliacs probably do also, though they may be unaware of these considerations. I suspect, also, that many of us believe that men have so damaged our world through their religions and wars, environmental wasteage, and more, that we feel that women cannot do worse. Rather, the 'nurturing' side of women would lead to a much more peaceful world and a healthier one.
Author's Response: Well, in my belief it wasn't because of the male gender these wars and religion stuff happened, but because that is human instinct. It is the mere fact that it WAS men that pull people towards this fetish.
Date: February 09 2016 2:18 AM Title: Reasons of Macrophilia
I would have to agree with Oblivious, it is definitly more about being tiny and being dominated by whatever features of a woman you find most appealing (feet, butt, boobs, etc..)
In addition, this fantasy may be impossible in a sense that you probably wont be able to shrink down to a small size. However, and this is merely speculation, so I don't want anyone taking this as a definite, but here goes.
Obviously technology has come a long way in such a short amount of time, one thing that has been kind of a big thing that people want to see is robots, another is technology that can be controlled using the mind. As of right now both these technologie exist, and are being heavily developed.
Who knows where this technology may lead, several years down the road, maybe a tiny robot of various sizes you can control with your mind. Combined that with some kind of VR headset like oculus linked to a camera on the bot, and you could be underfoot or whatever your into in no time.
Although, you might be thinking "well, it's not really you" which is true, however, that is probably as close as you can get without it actually being you. Unless you're one of the lucky ones that can incite a lucid dream whenever you want, unlike me :(
And like I said, I have no idea whether this will end up being a reality at all. I'm really trying to think of legit application for this type of thing to exist but they would probably end up causing a lot of chaos in the end.
Anyway, that was just me on my soapbox
Author's Response: Well, iPhones didn't exist in the last generation, so it is still a possibility. But as you said, it might end up in chaos, since humans don't have a good reputation when it comes to new stuff. I think a lot of people would actually want to become a tiny person or a towering monster, but as seen in some stories, the world might be in danger when that happens. But hey, I believe anything is possible. How else was a phone with one button going to become reality all of a sudden?
Date: February 08 2016 6:05 PM Title: Reasons of Macrophilia
*I apologize in advance for the massive block of text ahead. I have a lot to say on this matter*
Before anyone can really understand Macrophilia, I think it should be defined, but that's where the trouble comes in. I think of the biggest mistakes people do is generalize Macrophilia as simply "they like giant women" when in reality it's so much more than that. At least as far as I am concerned, Macrophilia one of the most complex and broadest paraphilia out there. Macrophilia can be broken down into two main categories, which are then further broken down into three distinct categories, each of those also breaking down farther. I won't even discuss gender with this, as I feel that is mostly a matter of sexual orientation. Not completely, but for the most part yes. However, being a hetero male I go for small guy, big women, and this is typically the norm.
It starts out simple enough, and with one split which, in the long run, doesn't make much of a difference. That is simple: Are people small against normal sized people, or are people normal against larger people? What's the difference, though? Well, when it gets farther, not that much. However, one distinction is that Small People generally tends to be on a smaller scale in terms of destruction (i.e. one-two people) while giant people is larger scale (i.e. towns and cities), of course, this can go either way, so it really doesn't make a difference.
Breaking it down further though, I see three distinctive categories of Macrophilia. Some people will be apart of all three, some only two, and some only one. (I am only into one category at all). So, what are they? Well, let me begin by saying I lied...sorta. I'll explain. When dealing with Macrophilia, there's Aware giantess, and then there is Unaware giantess. Unaware is pretty much a category/subtype on it's own, and that'll be the one I talk about the most as that's the only one I care about. As far as Aware goes, it breaks down into two subtypes: Gentle and Abusive. Now, I don't know much about these types, can I'm not interested in them, but my quick run down of them is as follows: Gentle is where the giant being and the shrunken being get along and have a normal, healthy relationship. There is very little "damage" done to the shrunken person, except for when done accidentally (in which case it enters "Unaware" section, more on that later). My guess on why someone would enjoy this (don't take my word for it) is to enjoy the comforting nature of someone who care for you, or a fantasy about being force to depend on someone else for your survival. But that's the best I got.
As far as Abusive goes, it's where the giant being is out to get the shrunken person. For whatever reason, they want to see them suffer, and knowingly torture them, fully aware it's a human being they are doing it to. I...do not like this type, at all. It's not my cup of tea, so I can't offer anything on it really, but people do enjoy it. *Please note Abusive is seperate from any "abusive" unaware sections because the giant actively knows it's a human.
And now the biggie: Unaware Giantess. This type is pretty much an entire class in itself. It encompasses pretty much everything in Macrophilia, so long as it fills one condition: The giant being is unaware of the smaller being. This can be further broken down into the size of the shrunken being, going all the way from "so small they can't be see at all" to "easily mistaken for a bug" (Yes, mistaken for a bug is counted as unaware, even though it techincally isn't, because as mention before, the giant being is -unaware- it's a human being. That's the key point here.) I could go on and on and this, but that's not the point, so now let's get to the real point.
Sort of. Macrophilia isn't just giant(ess) though, and I think that's also a problem when people generalize it. Unlike a lot of fetishes, Macrophilia combines with and encompasses so many other fetishes with it. Foot fetishes are extremely common with Macrophiliacs (I'm more into shoes myself), but it doesn't stop there. Pretty much any other fetish can be combined with Macrophilia, another big one is something like scat. And of course, vore. Vore pretty much goes hand in hand with Macrophilia, as it almost always invovled a shrunken person. Otherwise it's just canniablism. (Though I suppose there is non-human vore...I'm not that into it, only super soft vore/mouth play...don't even get me started on Hard vore ughdhfsdgf)
So now that the super long winded explination on what the hell Macrophilia is, why do we have it? What the hell is so appealing to us about it? If you couldn't tell by the mountain of text above, it varies greatly. Honestly, I can't tell you why anyone likes this fetish. The reason is because it's different for every person. It's different for how people were raised, what their life was like, what they are into in this fetish, etc, etc. To really get even a small idea why you like it, take a look at what you like! I'll do me, for example.
I'm heavily into micro unaware giantess. Basically, I'm extremely small against a giantess who are extremely big. I like to be amongst the dirt, be treated like dirt, and just be abused unknowingly by these giant women. Basically, they have Complete Control over me and my life. Now, how does this tie into me? Growing up, I had three sisters and a mom who I spent most of my time with. Me being the youngest they were always there to take care of me. I pretty much grew up around girls who took care of me and "controlled" me. See the corralation? It comes down to control, and in my case, unaware control. Girls who are deciding my every action, and don't even know they are. Can I explain it any further than that? Not really, I just like what I like, and go along with it.
So to wrap it all up: I don't think anyone can truely explain this fetish. Maybe that's why it's so overgeneralized because there really isn't a good way to explain it otherwise? If you are really curious as to why you like this, it's just something you'll have to ask and look at yourself. Now, just to touch on a few points you posted about:
-I have told a couple people about my fetish (including my ex) and they were fine with it. They were just mostly curious. Believe me when I say it, Macrophilia is far from the weirdest fetish out. Honestly, it's pretty damn normal, so never feel bad about it.
-I don't personally agree with your thoughts on Macrophilia being "wanting the impossible" but as I said, if that's what you feel it is for you, then by all means go with that. I'm also a very weird Macrophiliac because I'm Asexual, so any "sexual" tension from the giantess isn't actually from the giantess. I enjoy the aspect of being small and having no control, not being on or near a giant women. I've had fantasties that don't even involve giantess...just being small. But as I said, everyone is differnet.
-Dominance is a key factor, for sure. But even that is not set in stone. It's true that I would personally have an assertive woman over a passive one, and that follows suit into Macrophilia. But it's not stricly gender Male and Female. There are those that like giant men and small men. Or giant women and small women. As I said at the top, I feel it's mostly sexual orientation (though not always). Still though, Man on man or Female on female dominance is also a thing, so can't rule that out.
And that concludes this way too long essay on my thoughts. Thanks for reading!!
Author's Response: Thanks for the review longer than the actual post XD. I completely agree with what you are saying. I am aware of the vast branches this fetish includes, but I am trying to hit on the mainstream giant woman one. Of course there are far weirder fetishes (amputation, etc) and I am not ashamed of the fetish. You are indeed a unique one, as you are asexual, so we will have different views here and there. As you said, I did over generalize to keep things reasonable. I am glad I got to have this conversation with you. If you have other thoughts, please post another review :)
[Report This]Date: February 08 2016 7:06 AM Title: Reasons of Macrophilia
"We have come to a time where sex is normal. We find whatever normal is boring. We need something new." I really think you've cut to the chase there since this is in both sociology and socialpsychology the dominant opinion (Not related to the giantess fetish though). I'd agree that there's definetely a historcally contingent process behind the development of this fetish and definetely a technological one too.
On the other hand I think you're oversimplifying things a little here although you sure think into the right direction. Of course there have been a lot of important female persons impacting the world and still to be commonly known such as: Marie Curie, Margaret Thatcher, Queen Victoria, Elizabeth etc. And the gender sociology definitely is on a pathway to reveal and obliterate the, compared to the biological differences, way too high discursive social differences between man and woman. There is even a tendency to an increasing number of female politicians like Park geun-hye in South Korea, Angela Merkel in Germany and maybe even Hillary Clinton soon in the United States.
Still you're definetely right when you link the fetish to the Man's struggle with dominance while at the same time I wouldnt formulate it like "The man is tired of being dominant" since this s only putting him in a dominant position to decide he's not willing to be dominant again (Yeah sounding weird but it's true).
Furthermore there is also a fetish mostly fantasised about by men where the shrinking of women is essential as it is in some of the stories published on this very site.
I really like your grown-up, reasonable and enlightened attitude towards overcoming gender-problematics in it's countless facets like hollywood and think you have worked out a nice projection here.
There are several other projections though going in a more general ( not only F/m) direction trying to explain these kinds of fetishes by the general feeling of the individuum of being lost and insignificant in today's economic based society. I'd really like to have study's about where the concentraion of these fetishes are most frequent.
Sorry for the novel I wrote here but I really enjoyed reading and thinking about your projection :)
Author's Response: Thank you for your thoughts :D Some things I would like to say: I didn't want to go into immense detail about this topic, so I kept it simple. I am aware of those famous women, but try comparing that to the amount of famous men. Otherwise, I think you are absolutely correct, but didnt quite make it to my version. Thank you! :)