Normalizing plushophilia

I wonder when an how will plushophilia (sexual attraction to stuffed animals), will become normal and mainstream as BDSM apparently is becomming.
I have noticed in a wiki book how plushophilia was dismissed as " a non-issue". It brightened my day, but I still see many people getting the wrong impressions about it, and thinking that we are sick and need help.
As far as I know, the only thing I need help with is dealing with people's cruelty regarding plushophilia. They think that just because we are into plushies, we also are into actual animals, but no! I mean, real animals are cool, but I just don't find them sexually appealing to be honest.
Why do people get so worked up about it? I mean, it's just me cuddling and humping some stuffed animal and nothing happens. But people make it seem as if it was this horrible sickness.

I have an "unusual" kink and I'm pretty closeted about it. I think people are just starting understand there is a broad spectrum of sexual "ways of being" for lack of a better term.
If you can think of it, there is a fetish (and internet porn) for it.

Hopefully, people will come to the understanding that you need to be mindful of what your partner needs. A lot of people have hangups about fetishes but I have also know some fetish-y people are so rigid that they never engage in what their vanilla partner needs either.

That's true, and in the extremes is where the problems begin. We need to be a able to fulfill the other's needs too. Both partners matter.

I don't think there is anything wrong with what you described. Humping a stuffed animal doesn't seem much different than humping a pillow, and I'm pretty sure everyone's done that.

The "problem," using the word loosely and with no ill meaning, with plushophilia is that it's still pretty obscure in the list of 'philias the average Joe knows. BDSM has gradually been made mainstream (well, arguably...I would wager what most people out of a random sample think BDSM is differs substantially from what practitioners would define it as) as a result of a good long while of it being featured in various media. It is, for the purposes of conveying it in a book or movie, "plain" enough (if we're looking at the Hollywood version of it) to still strike a chord with an average vanilla reader yet different enough to still be "exotic," in a manner of speaking. Plushophilia would be substantially more difficult to relate in the same manner BDSM did.

I don't mean to imply plushophilia is strange or anything like that at all. I actually understand it much more than I do some others. Additionally, I'll concede my point is based off of very broad generalizations. But were I to lump plushophilia into the furry fandom (which technically, is that incorrect?) and what I've seen from the Internet's undeservedly harsh treatment of furries...there may be a ways to go.

In short, plushophiles need their own "50 shades of gray".

More or less, bingo.

A 50 shades of gray of plushophilia... whith some elements from the myth of Pygmalion.
Yeah, I guess it is because it is more difficult to relate to.
And yes, not all plushophiles are furries, and vice-versa.
I guess if a book was written about it, a la Ted for example, people would understand it more. Thanks for the responses

You know it's "normalized" when Oprah recommends the book and middle aged ladies share it at book club.