Talk:Clothing fetish

Fashion Mid‑importance

	Fashion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fashion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fashion on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FashionWikipedia:WikiProject FashionTemplate:WikiProject Fashionfashion articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sexology and sexuality Mid‑importance

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Pornography Low‑importance

	Erotica and pornography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pornography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of pornography-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PornographyWikipedia:WikiProject PornographyTemplate:WikiProject PornographyPornography articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Psychology Low‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 28 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

other materials in clothing[edit]

Neoprene is another modern trend in fetishware.

List of paraphilias[edit]

Each item of clothing should have a separate entry in the List of paraphilias, perhaps.

And each name of the paraphilia should be mentioned in this article. Jidanni (talk) 13:13, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Titian - Venus with a Mirror - Google Art Project.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:08, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Diaper fetishism[edit]

I have added a section on diaper fetishism, and (despite the initial undo) it is now one of the better sourced sections on the page.

Yes, I am a "DL", but I believe my contribution has been objective and it also doesn't change the fact that diaper fetishism is a real, relatively common and notable form of garment fetishism that has been referenced in both scientific journals and popular culture alike. (I am participating in the WikiProject on Sexology and Sexuality with my main goal being editing and improving articles relating to "ABDL".)

If anyone thinks that diaper fetishism is not applicable or appropriate for this page, let's talk about that, because I'm here to argue that it is. FuwaFuwaDL (talk) 17:01, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No problem with it now that it's sourced - I even fixed the date error for you - but bear in mind that admitting it is a personal issue and that you're here to argue that it is notable may not be the best way to bring people around to your way of thinking. Chaheel Riens (talk) 17:10, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you and I understand. Your initial undo felt selective to me, considering the pretty high number of existing unsourced sections in the article, but you're probably right to hold new contributions to a higher standard. Overall, this page needs better sourcing. (As do many pages related to fetishes and niche sexual practices.)

Still, it's important not to conflate honesty or transparency with bias. Just like a musician can contribute to an article on a specific genre of music without injecting bias, and a tennis player can contribute to an article on tennis rackets without injecting bias, I believe a member of a specific fetish community can contribute to pages relating to that fetish without injecting bias. (And I'd actually hazard a guess that they are the most likely to do so.) An editor can obfuscate their personal attachments, but they still exist either way.

Plus, I don't see that there's anything wrong with arguing for something to be included, removed or edited here. Hashing these things out is what these talk pages are for, right? The possibility of editing bias exists not only for additions, but also for removals/reversions of content, so if there is disagreement about the appropriateness of some content then I think it makes perfect sense to open it up to discussion. FuwaFuwaDL (talk) 17:46, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I do not believe a musician or sportsperson contributing to an article relating to their field is comparable to a person of a specific fetish community contributing to pages relating to that fetish, particularly in your case.

Some differences are that sports/tennis and/or music are experienced by virtually everyone at some point in their life and are also consistently common in many peoples lives, such as by actively playing music or a sport. They’re also well researched fields with notable impacts on human history and culture, and many could put up a valid argument that they are intimately intertwined with the human condition. It is incredibly less common for humans to engage in diaper fetishism, and I do not see any argument sufficiently equating it with the notability or impact of sports or music.

As such, sports and music(which also aren’t sexual fetishes)are considered “normal” and widespread, and due to humanity’s inherent acceptance of those things I believe those editors would likely have less of an inherent emotional interest and inherent bias about those topics(like rackets) in those two fields than you do in your topic, an admitted sexual fetishist with a vested interest(claiming that said niche fetish is “relatively common and notable,” 2 strong claims) in said sexual fetish. I would also assume people who play sports and music aren’t sexual fetishists of those two fields.

Justanotherguy54 (talk) 08:09, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Which of your sources support the claim that it is “relatively common”? How can that be defined? I am being demanding but extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence particularly when it comes to a contentious, cloudy topic like this Justanotherguy54 (talk) 06:57, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]