Perhaps why we are here?

[aquarian]

Having wondered why we are "sexual deviants" ( according to society ), I pondered when wetting ( the viewing of, in my case) first came to my sexual attention, so as to perhaps establish a reason/ cause. I believe it must have been about four or five years ago, while searching for upskirt pictures. For some reason, up popped one of Sky's samples. In short, I believe, this started my "deviancy." ( not blaming sky....I love it). Anyhow, I then wondered why this, and my consequent searches had such an effect on my preference ( viewing wise). Along came my link with classical conditioning of the behaviourist school....which basically goes thus...

BEFORE
Wetting ( non conditioned stimulus.)....no response

Sexual stimulation [upskirt]( unconditioned stimulus)....arousal ( unconditioned response)

DURING
Wetting ( non conditioned stimulus.)....( by seeing linked to upskirt....the sexual stimulation)...

a link is formed with the unconditioned response ( arousal)...THUS

AFTER
Conditioned stimulus ( wetting ), becomes linked with conditioned response ( arousal )....any more viewed connected material, will positively reinforce this

Sorry about the lengthy explanation....the only way I could try and explain the processs.....

Anyhow, as far as I can remember, this is hor I headed into deviancy. Wondered if anyone else believes it was the same, or if there are any other proffered explanation???

All comments would be interestiing.

Thanks, Aquarian ( back from his travels )
[/b]

[Ape]

There have been many threads here and over on Wetset that discuss how people when they were babies were touched in the private parts when the nappy was wet, and this triggered the link. For my part, I discovered it when I was a teenager, around the time of puberty, and I discovered it by doing it. No-one else was involved and perhaps like many here, I thought I was 'odd', until I saw an advert in a porn magazine, and then of course learnt more when I discovered the internet.

The key for me is simple - it is how it made me feel. To then know that someone else (a woman, in my case) is feeling that rush, that wetness etc.... wow!

[Ger]

It’s always interesting to see how different the situations are when and how people found out about the interest in pee things. For me it’s only interesting to see that many people started their interest at about the same age but under complete different situations and with another “thing” that triggered their interest. It’s also a tricky thing to write about because in many - if not most cases - it started in our puberty. And that’s not a thing you write about, because people can get the wrong ideas about telling childhood experiences on an adult website. Even if we have nothing wrong in mind with it.

For me it all started because my dad was telling my sister and me about the birds and the bees (I was around 12 by then) and he forgot one important thing to tell me. He told us about the little fishes that swim into a woman when you put your penis in a vagina. He told me there were millions of that little fishes. Then the first and fastest “little fish” meets the little “egg” inside the woman and hoppa, baby can start growing. An interesting thing to hear, so far I didn’t know it worked that way. He forgot to tell me however that those little fishes were in the sperm that I had never had and seen till that day. For some reason I thought it was swimming around in my pee. So every time I peed I really thought that I peed out millions of those little fishes that could make a woman pregnant. I know it sounds silly now, but I really thought that.

For some reason, that was the point where pee and having sex/making babies was connected to me, even when I was far too young to even think about having sex. It even went that far that I suddenly stopped peeing in the swimming pool because I thought that the little fishes could swim through the water after I peed and swim right into a woman. I didn’t want to make a girl pregnant, so I stopped peeing in pools. Till I saw a thing on TV telling that they put chlorine in swimming pool water to kill urine. The only thing I thought about that was: “oh, must be to kill the little fishes so girls can’t get pregnant.” Silly, I know. But that’s what I really thought. Alas... I started peeing in pools again because I was convinced that nothing bad could happen. I never had any nice feelings about peeing in the pool. I was just too lazy to get out of the water to go to the always-dirty – wet floor - bathrooms in there.

After my dad told us the birds and the bees story - and I don’t know if it was connected or just the age to be old enough to automatically try it - I started playing with myself. That also was pee related because I had to pee one day and knew that pinching my penis helped to reduce the need to pee. And so, one day, the need to pee completely disappeared and another weird but nice itching feeling came instead. I liked that feeling, although I had no idea what it was. Once again a result of the missing part that dad didn’t tell me... orgasm. I do remember that afterwards (dry orgasm btw) I had to run to the bathroom because the urge to pee came back 200 times as urgent as before. But it was another fact that related pee and sexual feelings to me. Need to pee, play with my penis, need to pee goes away, and a nice feeling comes instead. And then.... run to the bathroom to pee. It all made much sense to me.

And last but not least at the same time... if I got a nice feeling by pinching my penis when I needed to pee, I figured that the same would happen to a girl. So when I by coincidence saw a girl with a hand pressed in her crotch it really didn’t come to my mind that she was only trying to keep her pants dry. She was probably looking for that same nice itching feeling, I thought. And when she was walking around half an hour later after a run to the bathroom with nevertheless a wet crotch, the only thing I thought was: “ah, she got that same nice itching feeling and was just a bit to late to make it to the bathroom.” I didn’t have any more thoughts about it than just that. And my interest to see girls of my age holding their crotch was born, and when they had peed their pants a bit, OK, can happen. At least they probably had those nice feelings just before it happened.

I know folks that this all sounds rather weird. But that’s really how I got my interest. Of course I soon found out what an orgasm really was. Where the little fishes really were. That pee had nothing to do with it. But I think it was already too late for me. My interest in seeing a woman hold herself and pee herself was there and never disappeared. The little wet pee spot in jeans turned into a turn on to see. Of course the age of women that do this grew with me. I still prefer a little wet accident spot in a crotch above completely on purpose soaked jeans. Dunno why.

The only reason I started wetting myself was not because I loved the feeling. I only did it because when I grew older I didn’t see women anymore of my age who had peed themselves. And I am not interested in seeing kids do this. So I wet myself sneaky while watching in a mirror, pretending it wasn’t me wetting but the prettiest woman I knew. Almost automatically – after a while – I started to like the wet feeling myself too. And then I ran into the period where I had to keep this all secret for my mother who did the laundry and I had to think of 300 ways to keep my wet undies and so hidden and let them dry at a secret place.

Well, that’s basically how I got started, many many years ago. I know – like I wrote above – that this kind of youth memories is perhaps not exactly what is supposed to be here. I even get a bit nervous when others write here about those early memories like I just did. Especially if they include too many specific things. I think I didn't do that. But if Skymouse or any of my fellow “operators” in here think that my reply should be removed, go ahead. I only wrote it because it’s simply how things started with me. And someone asked for it. Can’t tell it in another way because then I would lie or change facts.

Ger.

[Val]

I can't remember when I started but it must have been a comfort thing I never really grew out of. It was certainly well before school age and linked to holding on and preventing myself, rather masochistic squashing erections and that sort of thing. I grew out of it discovering masturbation and then sex, but came back when stressed. Then I found one girlfriend into holding and wetting and thereafter I've been on and off occasionally ever since, but turned on by women turned on and by making sensations last as long as possible combining bladder and sex.

[bloom061604]

I've related the events that led to my panty-wetting awakening before, so I won't take up space here repeating it. If you're interested:

Click here (http://www.knicker-wetting.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=6333&highlight=remembrance)

The story is also posted on Shar and Ger's site.

—Bloom

[Crazyhorse]

I love your post Ger, especially the peeing of millions of tiny fishes. It does show what strange things we can conjure up when young.

Because women peed sitting down, for a long time as a small child I assumed the pee came out of their arse. :shock:

[Indigo]

Ah, but aquarian - according to society at large, your move from "upskirt voyeurism" to wetting was simply a move from one sexual deviancy to another. They had already marked your card as "deviant" long before you joined our happy band.

SOd 'em! Who cares what the majority think (politicians excapted, obviously ... )

[aquarian]

Here here Indigo....

Thanks for all the replies. They have been very interesting. I, also, loved Ger's account....Brilliant! And, having never found out about sperm, I also thought babies were made by peeing into a woman's vagina. Perhaps this was the first connection I made. I guess I will never know. Anyhow,

Thanks.

Aquarian

[Frodo]

Being wired up gay, my beginnings may have been different from most of you, but perhaps not entirely.

When I really think about it, I guess I learned that peeing (for males) meant exposing the penis, and that not peeing often resulted in pinching or rubbing the penis. Bladders and dicks became somehow entwined in my psyche, endowing pee with a sexual connotation as I got older. The fact that male plumbing is similarly entwined may have been an added factor. Urination and ejaculation share some of the same muscles and nerve endings.

Why the fascination with desperation? Perhaps anticipation of what might follow. And vulnerability. Even the most macho male must pee eventually, and to some, that means admitting a "weakness". It's especially exciting when YOU have to pee and I don't.

Urination is a great leveler. Whether we are rich or poor, beautiful or ugly, powerful or weak, we all need to pee sooner or later. Britney Spears pees. Brad Pitt pees. We share something in common with our idols. We expose our genitalia and squat or stand at the same porcelain fixtures, and we relieve the same need. When we do it in our pants, we experience the same embarrassment.

Society has granted urination a certain mystique. We perform it publically sorted by gender, and in private behind closed doors. Many people still run a faucet lest someone hear their tinkles in the bowl. We use many euphamisms to describe our need, and we hold to extreme discomfort rather than appear indelicate or weak.

Urine is considered "dirty", even though it is generally almost sterile. A person's pee is much less dangerous than his/her saliva! We kiss with umpunity and in public, but we recoil from pissing in the same situations. Such a contradiction!

I digress. Why does a guy desperate for a piss turn me on and where did it come from? I guess I'm just weird.

I suppose I empathise with a lot of Ger's account - I first thought of female genetalia as simply the "way girls pee" and it probably grew out of that. I was passively curious about girls who wet themselves at school, although I didn't think that at all odd, or really even know why.

Thanks to very open-minded and liberal parents I was never taught that iVictorian taboo which so many of my generation suffered when it came to "what happened down there" and accepted a quite open and couldn't give a damn perspective concerning bodily functions. They had to happen so why hide them? A visiting uncle once drew hoots of derision for confiding after a tense half-hour of fairly obvious restraint that he was "going to feed the goldfish".

"Do you mean you are going to the lavatory at last, Frank?" My mother asked: "Thank god. I thought you were going to wee on my sofa."

My awakening was after an evening drinking with a group of friends in my home town, back in my teens. One of the girls, slightly drunk and very desirable to me at that time, had been making moves to pair up with me and, when we finally made for home, joined me on a slow walk through the local park. There was a time of petting and touching on the benches there, then a stroll along the main street. We were kissing in a shop doorway when she confided, not really embarrassed, that she was "dying to go". I suppose that had been evident for a while, though I hadn't really thought about it. But with the next kiss (my leg was between hers) she pressed herself against my thigh and began to move. I was excited by the grinding motion - especially when I understood that a waterfall was suddenly happening over my thigh. It was no small trickle, either, but a cataract of major proportions: my first introduction to the amount and rapidity of some women's pee!

I could have been repulsed; revolted. I wasn't. I was so stimulated that I came within thirty seconds of entering her! I always regretted that....

[DavidEngland99]

Aquarian,

Your ideas correspond to B.F. Skinner's idea of animal and human nature - an extremely mechanical concept that has, I believe, been largely abandoned.

My interest in wetting goes right back to age 7 or eight. I remember looking at cop and cowboy programs on TV where people regularly seemed to get tied up! I always wondered what would happen if they needed to go to the toilet. Somehow, I was particularly fascinated by the idea that one of them would say, "Sorry but I'm about to wet myself!", and then pee - maybe soaking the others as well.

When I got to about 13, I found an old pair of trousers and underpants and realised that I could experience wetting myself for real without anyone knowing.....

I never really believe all these childhood trauma ideas about wetting. I mean, from a scientific point of view they are totally untestable, and childhood is full of exciting new events, so there is always something that fits the theory. Nobody ever asks where we get the strange idea that the opposite sex (soppy, boring girls!) are interesting. Nobody asks why people kiss. Nowadays, nobody asks why people engage in oral sex (although it used to be considered a major perversion). My point is that urine play is part of sex in the animal kingdom, and we have mostly suppressed that. We are, I think, liberated rather than perverted.

Another interesting fact, is that a study of the genes associated with human smell/taste receptors showed wide variability. In other words, people don't all smell/taste things the same way. Maybe some of us react to the smell of urine (which I have always felt was important) in a more animal way. BTW, I like animals, so for me, the adjective 'animal' is really a compliment!

A final tought. When we try to 'explain' our interest, we assume that we have a very rare sexual interest. I don't believe that. I think a fair percentage of people are like us, but, just like most of us, they don't feel a need to 'come out' - so we are hidden.

David

[Crazyhorse]

Aquarian initially mentions the phrase 'sexual deviants'. I dont like this at all. It is if we are condemning ourselves.
I dont feel that I am a deviant. Maybe others do, but that is up to them. Judging by some of the fetish sites I have browsed through, there are many other things that result in sexual excitement for some, but not for me, but is there a line that you cross to become deviant?

I've said this before but the part of desperation that excites me is where someone is deliberately refraining from visiting the toilet (or peeing in some private outdoor place), rather than being forced into a desperate situation by outside interference, but does that make people who like to 'engineer' desperation in a person deviant, and me not, and if so why?

I know this may be the perfect fantasy for some, but I would hate to be stuck in a lift with someone who was dying for a pee. It would be just so unfair, to be standing there with no worries while the other person was dancing and squirming around, and I could do nothing about their problem.

You might even argue that anything other than basic sexual intercourse is deviant, but if we have been given the ability to find certain actions sexually stimulating, and, either we practise them alone affecting no one but ourselves, or we find a partner who is willing to do the actions with (or for) us, then why should we stigmatise ourselves?

[aquarian]

Crazyhorse stated
then why should we stigmatise ourselves?

I personally agree. In my initial post, I was merely utilizing the term applied to us from those who are apparently authorities. Also, I agree that pratically anything apart from straight forward sex can be considered deviant. In fact, even that is deviant among militant catholics, if before marriage. Thus, deviance is obviously ( sub )culturally and temporally defined. As with the oral sex example mentioned by DavidEngland99, hopefully our "fetish" may in time enter the mainstream, and if we consider the members of this board as a sub-culture ( I believe that is acceptable), then we are the norm. Anyone here who didn't like wetting ( e.g. the flamers who condemn us), would be deviants. Oh well, I think I have gone majorly off-topic. Back to the original musing. Does anyone else have any ideas about the start of their interest?

Aquarian

[bloom061604]

Freud said the only abnormal sex is no sex. Everything else is just preference and opportunity.

—Bloom

[Val]

I don't like the 'deviant' implication either especially since the two sensations occur in the same place and affect each other. Sex almost always fills the bladder, full bladders usually lead to sexual sensations in everybody, 'into it' or not. In my book, deviation sets in A when it becomes a necessary substitute for straight sex, B if there is a generic inhibition preventing even the possibility of imagining sexual response most people would.

[DavidEngland99]

Lets face it, people use the word 'deviant' to be abusive about other people's sexuality! I think sexual desires form a huge spectrum from 'normal' sex on one end, through a range of 'extras', such as wetting, on to things which are undesirable, either because they hurt other people or because they mess up the person's life in various ways.

If only the medical profession would stop inventing stupid names - like urolagnia - for behaviour that perfectly well adjusted people enjoy. They should focus on the task of making people well adjusted and removing behaviour which is harmful.

If you search with GOOGLE you can easily find disturbing 'medical' descriptions for our 'condition'. I am some some wetters find these sites and get pretty upset, and it makes me quite angry. I wish some of those writers would come here and debate their ideas with us!

David

[Frodo]

I agree with David, as I often do. Just read the messages on this "deviant" board and you will discover intelligent, caring people who live productive lives and are a credit to humanity.

I liked Bloom's quote of Freud. Our turn-ons are harmless in the Grand Scheme of things, though the Terminally Righteous may find us beyond their rigid Pale.

I consider myself as much a child of God as any other, and I respond to the way He made me. I am a product of my genes and my environment, neither of which I could control, so as long as I strive to do as much good and as little harm as possible, I am doing as I should.

I'd like to know what straightforward or basic sex is. Missionaries at dusk? No foreplay? Or do we have to have straightforward basic foreplay too? Where does deniance and/or sexual criminality begin?

"When arrested the accused was found to have a mars bar in his pocket, which was obviously being carried with intent"

In some early flirting with a soon-to-be intimate friend, I was summed up as "A really kinky sod". Sod wasn't the word used, but it suffices. My reply was,as I recall: "Well, certainly different."

The point is, she wasn't averse to my kinkiness, she was interested. And when she found out the things I liked, quite happy to supply them. I do not believe, at least from my personal experience, that we are nearly as marginal as we suppose, or that we have needs so very different from whatever the norm is supposed to be. Society chooses to impose "norms" upon sexual behaviour: once in the theatre, the norms are those chosen by the individuals involved, and, as long as they don't injure anyone, society can go f***k itself.

Maybe some of us suffer from limitations we place upon ourselves. Perhaps we are too wary of crossing the sexual Rubicon with our sexual partners, or too confrontational when we do? The meeting of two taboos on a strange bed must be daunting - you can feel the "daunt" hanging over you sometimes...

Okay - I lanter on! But here's a thing...

At various times, I've played "dressing up" games: the usual uniforms are always popular (often wonder what the costume hire shops think when they get them back), but also, unsurprisingly, so is "adult baby". (p.s. I don't know how many of you have tried this, but I really recommend it, if just for the visit to Mothercare together before it happens: I got such an erection while discussing the choice of lotion I had to stay hidden behind the aisle for ten minutes, once)

I had no idea one co-conspirator I was with had any inclination towards wetting until we tried that game. After lots of "feeding" and powdering and lotions, etc. she began to pretend-cry, making it obvious I should check her nappy (or daiper, if you prefer- it was a bath towel actually). She had made it a little bit wet. I chided her that there was hardly sufficient there to warrant a "change" or a fresh bout with the cream, whereupon I was instructed to put the towel back under her for a minute. A brief moment of concentration, then she made sure the nappy needed changing! Then of course I had to respond - which I did, as you can imagine.

Almost always when playing these sort of games with a friend wetting will become part of the scenario. Popular for me has been the "daddy and little girl" role-play. My very adult "little girl" will usually bring "needing a wee-wee" into the script, with the inevitable connotations of naughtiness and ritual spanking.

My usual rambling - but I am sure, for what my opinion is worth - that we are not anything like as different as we suppose ourselves to be, sometimes. We just hang our colours on the mast, so to speak, and, often from our own fear of the reaction we will get, are clumsy or "scary" when we try to confide our needs. All NEEDS are scary, aren't they?

[Val]

I don't like AB at all but that's the point: like what I like or dislike doesn't speak with the authority of God! There's a huge debale over this between the 'free to do as we please' and the 'acting out conventional subordination' you can almost hear the monotonous concerned social worker tones in, when it comes to S&M play. I have noticed there though that there appears to be a difference that men are more considerate to their female slave while women show more genuine 'sissy contempt' and their slaves seem also to be genuinely ashamed of themselves. But also, they are overwhelmingly American (my German sin't good enough since they're the other large SM group) and that is a very macho culture where they might well be conditioned to feel that way.

I'd guess there are genuine problems when you can't tell exactly how the other side takes it. In one country, sex with a 16 year old is paederasty, in another normal. That's obviously law, not fact. With an 8-year old nobody would consider it normal even those who do it. But 2,000 years ago they did, providing the child was a possession. Bestiality?

Consenting adults? Some may remember the English 'Spanner' case where homosexul sadists were sentenced despite consent, and I heard a woman on a legal broadcast come close to the extreme feminist argument that under the excited conditions prevailing and unaware of the phsyical danger to themselves, 'consent' could never be 'informed'. Got me doubts about that! It sounds too easy to apply to any circumstance. After all, when everybody is not in an 'abnormal' erotic state, they're not likely to want to do anthing anyway.

[Frodo]

The "harm" done by so-called "deviant" practices is often accomplished by the do-gooders who make a big deal about what was acceptable to (and even enjoyed by) the participants at the time. Nobody thought it was bad until it was labeled as such. Then they became victims of retroactive guilt...

[Val]

I answered you Frod and the entire INet café hung, I wnet to another, that machine was no good and this is now closing. COULDN'T AGREE MORE