Long story short, I have been lurking in this message board without creating an account of my own for the last couple months believing that I must be dacryphilic.... And yet I have concluded recently that there is still something not exactly fitting about my personal case in terms of entrance to this community.

I believed I must be dacryphilic as I am certainly aroused almost exclusively when someone (including myself) is in strong emotional uproar that is enough to make the person cry or weep. According to how Dr. Mark Griffiths defined dacryphilia in Psychology Today, his definition focuses on emotional vulnerability and/or the display of strong emotion, and by this definition by kink does meet how dacryphilia is denoted.

Yet, that is a definition by a medical person who does not have dacryphilia himself.... And according to what I noticed by lurking here for the last two months, I actually noticed that almost 90% of our members here are really into the physical element of tears (the liquid)? And that is where I started to feel that I might not meet the standard of dacryphilia proper because, honestly, I do not feel much interest in the tears per se.

As for my personal case, I am not very interested in the tears, and more specifically, I am into situational cues where a person becomes so desperate by situation that he/she cannot sugarcoat their emotions anymore. Of course, for most cases, that involves crying, so I guess that was the reason why I first had dacryphilia in mind when it comes to illustrating my kink, but I think I am a little bit different from the majority of our members in the board for not being interested in the tears but in the situation cues like these, and so I started to feel that I might not be a fitting person for this message board ._.

For example, I do not feel any sort of arousal when someone is crying because of happy tears instead of emotional vulnerability, while I do feel the arousal even when the physical tears are not present a