Some of the notations about which groups predominately practice particular fetishes seemed contrary to my observations, and some of the links (cutting with blood, for example) may be true for some individuals, but are definitely not for people I've known.

Adding roleplaying and costume play seems like a brilliant idea to me, especially as one can then distinguish between people who like, for example, policeman in uniform as a costume or rapist as a role from those who require certain knowledge of authenticity to feel sexual stimulation.

Meanwhile, I'm pondering where on that map you'd locate someone who -- without prior arrangement, warning, or consent -- read the entire final sequence of R. L. Fanthorpe's Flame Mass to his thoroughly immobilized sweetie.

I've been thinking about those missing elements too. I think she's using a concept of fetish that focuses strongly on the specific objects to which desire is attached. It could be argued that roles can be pretty much an interpersonal construction, less fixed than e.g. a fetish for a substance like rubber. Does a "slave" fetishize his "mistress", or does he fetishize her "boots"? To me the difference there seems substantial.

Of course, in costume play the roles are a lot more thingified than in more improvised control-exchange situations, I agree that should have it's own colourfield in the map.

[On preview] I found the old version of the map here: http://www.deviantdesires.com/map/loonmain.html, obviously; from there you'll find more about how she ordered the map, too.

Teresa, she already has shoe fetishes. I assume these things are mix and match?

Gender- and orientation-related practices are missing, too. Fag hags and dutch boys will look for themselves on the chart in vain (unless I've missed something subtle).

Is anyone else bothered by the fact that "notably high ratio of female fetishists" is thought worthy of comment, when high ratios of male fetishists are unremarked? It looks to me like Gates is presuming that

Now, if you could only get off if everything were decked out in tantric trappings, that would be a fetish.

Gender orientation isn't there because gender orientation isn't a fetish. Gender orientation orientation may or may not be a fetish. Somebody ought to look into that.

I don't know why Gates flagged more areas that have a high ratio of female fetishists, while not flagging areas like crush freaks that are heavily male. She's female; maybe those were areas she knew more about. Maybe she had a female audience in mind when she compiled the map. Maybe it's something else. I sincerely doubt that someone who'd compile a map like that believes that deviancy primarily defaults to one gender.

Besides, when you're talking about expressions of deviancy, which is what that chart is doing, maleness is the default. It won't be the default forever, but right now it surely is.

It's only recently that women have been a position to express their sexuality at all, outside of a few constrained roles. Airing their kinks comes after.

More on shoes anon. My sysadmin has to do some tampering here.

Gates actually comments about this at http://www.deviantdesires.com/faq/ratio.html -- the short version seems to be she feels that women are sufficiently under-regarded as fetishists that it's worthwhile to make note of fetishes that women paricipate heavily in.

I think I was missing something.

Bob, I can't help you on the SysAdmin front, but I do know one underexploited area of techie enthusiasm. There's a certain small fraction of the geek girl population that's oddly passionate about Junkyard Wars. You may not get anywhere with them by telling them about pgrep, but an offer to teach them how to weld, then watching the "Mega Wars" episode on tape while phoning out for pizza, might do very well indeed.