Fetish VS Paraphilia

I've been doing some research on this. And I still can't tell if I have a Fetish or Paraphilia when it comes to Tickling.

It SEEMS like Fetishism falls UNDER Paraphilia? At least that's what I'm reading. (In SOME articles. Not all.)

Having a Paraphilia makes it seem that one is dangerous to others. (Like beastiality -and pedophiles are consistently brought up which disgusts me to have to be under the same broad definition i.e Paraphilia.) But there is a list of Paraphilias and both Pternophile (Arousal by being tickled by feathers.) And Geniophile (Aroused by seeing people laugh, or by laughter.) make the list found here: https://healthtian.com/list-of-paraphilias/

(Idk if this is taken from the recent DSM manuel. Also I am seeing fetishes I have never heard of before. This is quite a list. lol Who knew there was a fetish for chins?)

I'm just a little confused.

Also: I would say I definetly am a Geniophile and Pternophile. How many different "philes" are there that surround Tickling? Does anyone have a definitive list? I'd love to see how many relate to me. (And for others to see in relation to themselves.)

Maybe some folks think too much?

rdhd said:

Maybe some folks think too much?

Click to expand...

CapturedDoll said:

Click to expand...

Tickle, tickle, tickle....... but, for these days.....alas (oh, but you are a lass......)

Myriads made a post once making the argument that it's a paraphilia. I thought he made a very good case and agreed with his take. Unfortunately, I can't recall which thread it was in. I'm cool with referring to it as a fetish though, because it's become a part of our vernacular.

As with my social, philosophical and religious beliefs, I prefer to defy exact definition. I guess that may well extend to my tickling fetish. I've never felt the need to conform. I feel no need to start now.

"Our wretched species is so made that those who walk on the well-trodden path always throw stones at those who are showing a new road." - Voltaire

I always thought paraphilia meant someone aroused by by something other than what's considered "normal" sexual activity. It's not harmful unless the fetish itself is harmful, like abuse, or pedophilia.

A fetish is a subclass of paraphilia.

A paraphilia is simply a preference for something that produces a sexual response that is off the cultural norm for a society.

A fetish is a paraphilia that has become a disfunction in a persons sexual psychology. One can no longer achieve sexual satisfaction without the fetish action/item being present in the situation.

If you can 'get off' without tickling being part of things, then you have a paraphilia, if you can only get off with tickling being involved you have a fetish.

Myriads

I was under the impression that paraphilia/partialism involves a body part, while strictly speaking a fetish involves an inanimate object.

I have a paraphilia for tickling because I can get aroused without it. Thanks to the last thread I posted in, I remembered the difference between that and a fetish lol. I tend to forget.

For the other two you mentioned, I don't have a kink specifically for feathers or laughter.

Oh sweet, innocent child. "Paraphilia" is just the official, medical name for a fetish or kink. That's literally all it is.
"Fetish" is not an official term and has only come into public use in the last few decades; "officially" it still only refers to kinks that revolve around objects, say shoe fetishism. (Since the term "fetish" originates from a word in anthropology for objects that have magical properties in tribal religions.) But people have long adopted it as the colloquialism for any kink, even ones not involving objects (like tickling), for the simple reason that "paraphilia" sounds awful, like an infectious disease or something. xD

Classical psychology had a harsher view on fetishes (as well as homosexuality), any sexual deviation was seen as preventing the user from finding fulfilment in "normal" sexual behavior, and to be cured with therapy. As time went on more psychologists have adopted the stance that trying to cure otherwise harmless sexual habits may cause more harm than benefit to the patient and may not even work. It definitely helped that society have become more sexually liberal with each subsequent decade. But psychiatric literature still often shows that somewhat conservative view.

So don't try to figure out if you have a fetish or a paraphilia, that's literally like asking if you have a beard or facial hair. They are the same thing.

whade said:

So don't try to figure out if you have a fetish or a paraphilia, that's literally like asking if you have a beard or facial hair. They are the same thing.

Click to expand...

What if the person’s only facial hair is a mustache?.

I've spoken about this in other threads, but the fact that tickling is my only source of sexual interest is also a cause for much of my depression. I feel so isolated and I'm afraid I'll never be able to have a normal relationship. It's such a lonely feeling. I haven't discussed this very much with my therapist, though I probably should.

My tickling fetish is a part of me, but it's also caused a great deal of depression and prevented me from dating for the last couple years.

whade said:

Oh sweet, innocent child. "Paraphilia" is just the official, medical name for a fetish or kink. That's literally all it is.
"Fetish" is not an official term and has only come into public use in the last few decades; "officially" it still only refers to kinks that revolve around objects, say shoe fetishism. (Since the term "fetish" originates from a word in anthropology for objects that have magical properties in tribal religions.) But people have long adopted it as the colloquialism for any kink, even ones not involving objects (like tickling), for the simple reason that "paraphilia" sounds awful, like an infectious disease or something. xD

Classical psychology had a harsher view on fetishes (as well as homosexuality), any sexual deviation was seen as preventing the user from finding fulfilment in "normal" sexual behavior, and to be cured with therapy. As time went on more psychologists have adopted the stance that trying to cure otherwise harmless sexual habits may cause more harm than benefit to the patient and may not even work. It definitely helped that society have become more sexually liberal with each subsequent decade. But psychiatric literature still often shows that somewhat conservative view.

So don't try to figure out if you have a fetish or a paraphilia, that's literally like asking if you have a beard or facial hair. They are the same thing.

Click to expand...

No. Wrong.

Both terms Paraphilia and Fetish have been used as psychological terms and defined since the DS2 or so. Both terms have standing in psychology.

Fetish HAS become degraded in popular meaning due to the general publics use of it to describe any odd thing that turns someone on. But it has yet to cause the psychological definitions to be removed.

All Fetishes ARE Paraphilia. They are Paraphilia that have advanced to the point as to causing sexual disfunction. In that the individual holding the fetish cannot have a sexual interaction that is able to be completed (physically, psychologically or both) to satisfaction without the presence of the fetish object/action being present.

Not all Paraphilia are Fetishes. All a Paraphilia is, is psychologically a preference for something that leads to sexual arousal. In that one can like or prefer to have it included in a sexual interaction, but it is not needful for successful (physical, psychological, both) completion of the sex act.

An example for clarity.

John gets turned on by tickling feet. Just thinking about it is a turn on. It gets him hard. And if he does it with a partner he has a very satisfying time. He likes to do this often, as it's so satisfying. But John is also able to have sex in the traditional way, equally enjoying the experience when he finds a partner that is a hard no on tickling. John has a paraphilia.

Jack gets turned on by tickling feet. Just thinking about it is a turn on. It gets him hard. If he's with a partner he needs to tickle their feet to reach satisfaction. If he cannot it's just an experience that he feels frustrated by. Normal sex has no real appeal, and he may not be able to perform it physically, or if he can finds it unsatisfying. He may well see no point to it at all, and consider a sex act just the tickling now. He has a fetish. It's directly interfering with a normative sex life.

All Beards are facial hair. All facial hair is not a beard (Hello eye brows and lashes) They are NOT the same thing, and its why we have the term beard. It handily discriminates between hair where beards are, and that that is elsewhere on the face.

Fetish is a specific term that discriminates between a paraphilia that is simply a nice addition to a greater sexuality and one that has eaten that sexuality whole.

Myriads

"Paraphilia" sounds awfully like some mental disease to me So I feel instinctively reluctant to use the term. Mind you, I am no scientist.

I use the term "fetish" every now and then because it has somewhat entered the common lexicon, but in general I simply say I like tickling or that I have a thing for it, sometimes going as far as using the French word "penchant"

Myriads said:

Both terms Paraphilia and Fetish have been used as psychological terms and defined since the DS2 or so.

Click to expand...

No fault on your part, but my geeky brain made me read this as "Dark Souls 2" I need help, I know

tbf, bibliophilia / bibliophile is a love/lover of books and it's got a pretty benign connotation imo

I don't need it to get off, it just adds to it.

chicago said:

tbf, bibliophilia / bibliophile is a love/lover of books and it's got a pretty benign connotation imo

Click to expand...

You're right. I am not sure what bothers me in it per se. Is it the "P" at the beginning, the way it strangely sounds like "pedophilia"? Is it because it points to sexuality ? I have no idea, it just sounds not right to me. I do not know whether I am the only one there

For sure I would have no problem if someone called me a bibliophile, though I spontaneously would use such terms as "intellectual", or "avid reader" myself.

When I was in my twenties, I asked another guy whom I consider my mentor in this fetish universe (he used to be on this forum but he left), what he thought about the term "paraphilia" and he dismissed it as "another invention by anglo-saxon doctors who turned the noble purpose of medicine into a business" Not saying I agree with him but the thread reminded me of what he said.

Tenebrae said:

"Paraphilia" sounds awfully like some mental disease to me So I feel instinctively reluctant to use the term. Mind you, I am no scientist.

I use the term "fetish" every now and then because it has somewhat entered the common lexicon, but in general I simply say I like tickling or that I have a thing for it, sometimes going as far as using the French word "penchant"

Click to expand...

The term has become so degraded in the general population there is no reason for you not to, if you feel comfortable with it over the more clinical paraphilia. It's one of those cases where being precise is not more important then getting your meaning across, and to the layman 'fetish' will convert exactly what you want.

It's not even a loaded 'creepy' concept anymore as it was in the 80's and before.

So go get your fetish on.

Myriads

Myriads said:

It's not even a loaded 'creepy' concept anymore as it was in the 80's and before.

So go get your fetish on.

Myriads

Click to expand...

Thanks for all this positivity God knows we need it these days.

Interesting, the 80's thing. I was a baby back then, so I wouldn't know. I became very eager to tickle girls as soon as I started going to school, but of course there was no mention about fetishes as such a young age. In fact, come to think of it, I think I saw the world "fetish" for the first time only when I started to have the Internet.

Tangentially, the first time I saw the term "handjob", I thought it was a job ad for a company that needed someone for some construction work, you know, manual labor. Imagine my surprise when I found out what it really meant

Myriads said:

No. Wrong.

Both terms Paraphilia and Fetish have been used as psychological terms and defined since the DS2 or so. Both terms have standing in psychology.

Fetish HAS become degraded in popular meaning due to the general publics use of it to describe any odd thing that turns someone on. But it has yet to cause the psychological definitions to be removed.

All Fetishes ARE Paraphilia. They are Paraphilia that have advanced to the point as to causing sexual disfunction. In that the individual holding the fetish cannot have a sexual interaction that is able to be completed (physically, psychologically or both) to satisfaction without the presence of the fetish object/action being present.

Not all Paraphilia are Fetishes. All a Paraphilia is, is psychologically a preference for something that leads to sexual arousal. In that one can like or prefer to have it included in a sexual interaction, but it is not needful for successful (physical, psychological, both) completion of the sex act.

An example for clarity.

John gets turned on by tickling feet. Just thinking about it is a turn on. It gets him hard. And if he does it with a partner he has a very satisfying time. He likes to do this often, as it's so satisfying. But John is also able to have sex in the traditional way, equally enjoying the experience when he finds a partner that is a hard no on tickling. John has a paraphilia.

Jack gets turned on by tickling feet. Just thinking about it is a turn on. It gets him hard. If he's with a partner he needs to tickle their feet to reach satisfaction. If he cannot it's just an experience that he feels frustrated by. Normal sex has no real appeal, and he may not be able to perform it physically, or if he can finds it unsatisfying. He may well see no point to it at all, and consider a sex act just the tickling now. He has a fetish. It's directly interfering with a normative sex life.

All Beards are facial hair. All facial hair is not a beard (Hello eye brows and lashes) They are NOT the same thing, and its why we have the term beard. It handily discriminates between hair where beards are, and that that is elsewhere on the face.

Fetish is a specific term that discriminates between a paraphilia that is simply a nice addition to a greater sexuality and one that has eaten that sexuality whole.

Myriads

Click to expand...

Cool insight. Paraphilia sounds awful though. Id much rather say I have a fetish. Lol. Is it really a disfunction really? Doesnt everyone have something they need to get hard?

RavensFan52 said:

Cool insight. Paraphilia sounds awful though. Id much rather say I have a fetish. Lol. Is it really a disfunction really? Doesnt everyone have something they need to get hard?

Click to expand...

Disfunction is one of those clinical terms that always sounds worse than it often is.

Basically psychology defines a 'norm' for behavior that is based around how mass numbers of people behave, modified by cultural aspects and then with that firm 'norm' set they define functionality and thus disfunction moving out from that.

So in our culture and time the norm for sexual arousal (and I'll use male perspective alone for simplicity here) is seeing genitalia, breasts and asses of women visibly, and the idea of a fairly expected set of sexual acts (Fucking, oral sex). This defines the 'norm' for us here in the US and in 2020.

Now anything that is outside that norm starts to move up the scale of disfunction.

The more the act that is needed is mandatory for positive resolution of sexual desire the more dysfunctional one is deemed.

So if you have a paraphilia then all psychology is saying is that you have a preference that is outside the norm. Nothing more.

It says if you have a fetish you have a sexual disfunction because of how strongly that paraphilia has impacted your ability to have a normative sexual resolution without it being there.

The real issues most face is when these terms sift into layman discussion and they are not well defined, and pick up additional and often negative connotations. The word fetish has had this trajectory. Prior to the early 90's it was considered a pretty negative term to be saddled with. But in popular culture it became a phrase to mean "They have a kink" or "This is a turn on that is a little different" and the cultural connotation softenedmeven as the word got distorted from its clinical meaning.

My opinion is don't worry so much what it's called, as much as your relation to the behavior in your life.

Does tickling add to your sex life? Or has it consumed it to the exclusion of all else? Do you (can you) enjoy a wide range of things? I think almost everyone has something that they enjoy that falls off the norm. And its all about fitting that like into the entirety of their sexuality that really maters.

Getting turned on by tickling, or feet, or forced orgasms, or being jerked off with a rubber gloved hand, or being choked, and so on are all not that weird. They all can add to ones enjoyment of sex. Just so long as they don't BECOME sex in of themselves alone. Sex is a process that ones does, not a thing you 'have'. There are infinite ways to do it. And they are cool if everyone is on board.

Myriads