- This topic has 13 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 3 weeks, 1 day ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Whenever I see personals or discussions about ANR/ABF, the term “bonding” is mentioned quite frequently. I feel like this term carries connotations of caretaking, regression, or age-play dynamics. These don’t resonate with me at all. I don’t get the whole “bonding” thing in that sense.
That being said, I don’t see this as transactional. I’m drawn to this because of the erotic, tender side of it. I enjoy the nipple play associated with ANR/ABF, and the feelings that come with it.
Does anyone else here view ANR/ABF as erotic extended breast/nipple play between two equal adults, completely stripped of any caregiver or regression themes?
(Not really here to discuss or debate what a ‘real ANR’ is or ‘ANR vs ABF’ thank you).
I think the word “bonding” gets interpreted a little too narrowly sometimes. To me, bonding simply means experiencing a sense of connection with another person. It doesn’t automatically imply caregiving, regression, or any particular power dynamic.
Two adults can share something intensely erotic and still experience tenderness and emotional intimacy without either person assuming a particular role. In fact, I think the combination of eroticism and genuine affection is part of what makes it so appealing.
Perhaps we’re not all looking for different things so much as using different language to describe them. And there’s certainly room for all of it. 😉
Yes LondonMan I get really disconnected when I think about men not caring who the person behind the boob is and it’s just a boob that satisfies cravings..it could even be a robot boob that has the look and feel of a human. I don’t even feel like I can relate to that person and his needs. Why go meet him if he doesn’t care about me at all.. this is not a rant but I am just trying to understand your post if what I said above is not what you were implying. Please educate me. I am really interested in knowing why you feel that I don’t matter if that’s the case.
@lolamayi12345 Yes perhaps it’s different interpretations of the term.
@sind Literally nothing in my post implies any of that.Thank you I was hoping that you didn’t mean that but wanted to make sure.
I see abf as connecting like we connect to a beautiful scenery with our senses, like we experience a wonderful desert when we eat it, like we enjoy music that speaks to us, like we feel something in our hearts when we exchange a smile, a tender moment etc.
These bonds may not necessarily be everlasting in that we may forget them after some time but there are some that make an impression in our minds and hearts if we’re open to it.
Not everyone thinks like that I understand but most of us have feelings and sometimes they go really deep, or fill an empty space or touch us where and when we least expect it to.
This mostly happens when we go through some pain or suffering in life and we’re looking for some comfort from others. It’s in our nature to reach out to others as humans. If we don’t then these repressed feelings may show up later in life like what you discussed in your post.
So if we’re bonded by abf we may go separate ways too but the bond remains whenever we think of that person. That’s what makes us humans I think. We relate to one other in a deeper sense sometimes and we may call it a bond or love or connection or whatever name we would like to but it is a connection for a finite time in some cases and lasts for infinity in others.
I never saw bonding as a mother and son thing, I always saw it as a communication and correspondence, and really not submissive or dominant either, simply connecting.
As Lola mentioned, bonding is feeling connected. It’s one of the essential factor for any intimate relationship.
As Sparkling said, without bonding it’s robot boob. In my opinion, it becomes a just mechanical process without bonding.
ANR is about long term relationship with a person, not just an anatomical part of the body.“ANR is about long term relationship with a person, not just an anatomical part of the body” – I didn’t suggest otherwise..?
Honestly baffled by people making comments about things I haven’t even mentioned in my original post. I even said this isn’t a debate about what a ‘real ANR’ is. I was specifically talking about connotations of caretaking, regression, or age-play dynamics.
I’ve been a member of this site since its inception. I really miss how people were able to discuss this kink in a judgement-free zone. Seems like now all discussions just resort to “no true Scotsman” replies.
You were trying to determine how many people feel the way you do correct?
I apologize if you feel like you were singled out in any way. That wasn’t the intention at all from my post. Everyone can have a certain idea. From a a certain kind of woman’s point of view, I am continuously exposed to men who use nursing as an excuse for sex, masturbation, getting a woman to show them their breasts so it’s a touchy topic for me.
But you definitely should not feel like you were being judged in any way.
I had to read your post several times to understand it. If you mean that abf should be enjoyed by both parties as a prelude to sex or without sex, without having to add any other labels to it then so be it. That’s how you define it and that’s fine too.
I’m not into any kind of age play, but I do get more attached to my partner and more bonded, than I think I would in another dynamic. I think it has to do with the oxytocin from it.
Without having access to people’s private messages, I suspect it is more so men who are interested in the age play dynamic around ABF than women or that has been my experience. You will notice that a lot of women have “no mommy/baby” on their profiles. They put that because they have been asked A LOT by men on here if they might be open to that in some fashion. If you do not want a mommy/baby dynamic for bonding, then you are probably going to match with more women in that way and not fewer.
What is the definition of the word bonding in the dictionary?
Merriam-Webster defines it as:
“The formation of a close relationship (as between a mother and child or between a person and an animal) especially through frequent or constant association.”
I think what’s interesting about that definition is that the examples are just that, examples. They don’t define or limit the kinds of relationships in which bonding can occur.
There’s actually some fascinating biology behind it, too. Oxytocin is often called the “bonding hormone” because of its role in social attachment and emotional connection. Yes, mothers experience it when bonding with their babies, but oxytocin is also involved in romantic relationships, physical intimacy, and even how dogs bond with their humans and other dogs.
Studies have even shown that gazing into your dog’s eyes can increase oxytocin levels in both of you. Pretty fascinating when you think about it!
So when I hear someone describe ANR/ABF as bonding, I don’t automatically associate it with caretaking, regression, or age play. I think of two adults sharing an intimate experience that can strengthen their emotional connection. For some people, that experience might also involve nurturing or other dynamics, and that’s perfectly fine. But those dynamics aren’t prerequisites for bonding.
And I can certainly understand how someone might make those associations, especially given the nature of ANR/ABF. We all bring our own experiences, preferences, and perspectives into how we interpret language.
I think that’s what makes this discussion interesting. There’s the actual definition of a word, the connotations it carries, and then the personal meaning we attach to it. Those three things aren’t always the same.
Two people can use the exact same word, agree on its definition, and still have completely different emotional reactions to it.
Maybe the real question isn’t whether bonding is the right word, but whether we’re assuming that everyone who uses it means the same thing we hear when they say it.
So to answer your question, I think the majority of people on this site see ANR probably the same way you do.
@showerthoughts: hear hear!
The way we define ‘bonding’ or ‘anr’ can be limiting and confusing. We think we talk about the same thing but maybe its helpful to check.
So @londonman, I dont think you are wrong. It might be interesting to evaluate your definition of bonding. Your associations with the word ‘bonding’ are yours and as such they are valid. Its also clear different people have different associations with it. That’s okay. Its informative, pick what is useful and leave the rest. Its not a competition in right or wrong.
It might be helpful to evaluate your definition and widen it. Or choose a word that you find better suitable for what you want/feel/need. Could it be Connection? Up to you.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.