>>509373924
too broad a categorisation to be of practical scientific value. thats likely why it didnt catch on from 1991.

are all fetish depicted as " erotic target location errors? "
why?
what is a fetish?
why liking one thing isnt a fetish, but liking another thing is a fetish?
whats the difference between acceptable fetish and error?
who decides it and why?
why even call it an error?