• The TMF is sponsored by Clips4sale - By supporting them, you're supporting us.
  • >>> If you cannot get into your account email me at [email protected] <<<
    Don't forget to include your username

The TMF is sponsored by:

Clips4Sale Banner

The Question of Ethical Tickling

Yea the idea of saying to one of my friends " hey um I was wondering if maybe I could tickle you. Cause its a turn on for me and I want to make sure its ok with you" LOL. That just makes the moment strange when it doesnt have to be.

How strange would it be if you found out someone was doing something to you "y'lnow, as just a fun, playful thing" that you didn't know turned them on?
 
How strange would it be if you found out someone was doing something to you "y'lnow, as just a fun, playful thing" that you didn't know turned them on?

Its unrealistic to think it hasnt happened to me already. If I found out I doubt I would care. Give me an example senerio.
 
Its unrealistic to think it hasnt happened to me already. If I found out I doubt I would care. Give me an example senerio.


As you've already said, you wouldn't care. Can you see that someone might?
 
Of course I can. I dont see how that makes asking someone its ok to tickle them any less akward

Oh, I don't think it's necessary to ask them. I think it's necessary to have a relationship where playful flirtatious physical contact is mutually accepted. That's not hard or awkward at all.
 
Not sure if you understand what an analogy is, but I see it again...



If you aren't going to see it, though, then I guess you just won't.

Anyway, sure, I imagined what you said. It just seems like a deflection, though, because whether or not someone is ethically obligated to divulge their thoughts has absolutely nothing to do with whether it’s ethical for someone to take clandestine sexually-motivated actions on someone. And a person who tries to cover their bases by [under]informing the other person (“I like tickling”, etc) would still fall in that scope if they feel their true motivations are still concealed. If you’re wondering what other choice someone could have in that scenario, one is to not tickle the person *and* not reveal their thoughts about being aroused by tickling.

The "someone" was supposed to state "something" so I am guilty of a typo.
 
Not sure if you understand what an analogy is, but I see it again...



If you aren't going to see it, though, then I guess you just won't.

Anyway, sure, I imagined what you said. It just seems like a deflection, though, because whether or not someone is ethically obligated to divulge their thoughts has absolutely nothing to do with whether it’s ethical for someone to take clandestine sexually-motivated actions on someone. And a person who tries to cover their bases by [under]informing the other person (“I like tickling”, etc) would still fall in that scope if they feel their true motivations are still concealed. If you’re wondering what other choice someone could have in that scenario, one is to not tickle the person *and* not reveal their thoughts about being aroused by tickling.

And, your entire premise seems based on the idea that you are not motivated to share your regular thoughts with someone on why you want something, but are obligated to share sexual thoughts. Which I just flat out disagree with. If I get a boner shaking someone's hand--that's not automatically their business as long as the act itself is a socially acceptable one they are ok with. If you are going to try to claim "they might not be ok with it if they knew..." well, then I will simply repeat plenty of the above, and say that's a mentality of a sexually repressed society who acts like seeking thrills is a bad thing. If the person is ok with the act anyway--that's a risk they are taking by doing it.

I would argue if someone would change their mind based on such things, it's more their obligation to ask than the other person's to divulge. Or we can be adults and just accept the potential risk of turning someone on through regular day things and stop being a bunch of weenies over it.
 
And, your entire premise seems based on the idea that you are not motivated to share your regular thoughts with someone on why you want something, but are obligated to share sexual thoughts. Which I just flat out disagree with. If I get a boner shaking someone's hand--that's not automatically their business as long as the act itself is a socially acceptable one they are ok with. If you are going to try to claim "they might not be ok with it if they knew..." well, then I will simply repeat plenty of the above, and say that's a mentality of a sexually repressed society who acts like seeking thrills is a bad thing. If the person is ok with the act anyway--that's a risk they are taking by doing it.

I would argue if someone would change their mind based on such things, it's more their obligation to ask than the other person's to divulge. Or we can be adults and just accept the potential risk of turning someone on through regular day things and stop being a bunch of weenies over it.

There's nothing wrong with seeking thrills.
Getting your thrills off another person, without their consent, while hiding that you're getting your thrills from them, claiming it's a risk they're taking by having anything to do with you...kind of reduces you to something akin to full-contact voyeurism, doesn't it?
 
There's nothing wrong with seeking thrills.
Getting your thrills off another person, without their consent, while hiding that you're getting your thrills from them, claiming it's a risk they're taking by having anything to do with you...kind of reduces you to something akin to full-contact voyeurism, doesn't it?

I disagree Wolf. We're all adults here and are responsible for our actions. Nobody's talking about crossing the line and violating someone else's space.
 
There's nothing wrong with seeking thrills.
Getting your thrills off another person, without their consent, while hiding that you're getting your thrills from them, claiming it's a risk they're taking by having anything to do with you...kind of reduces you to something akin to full-contact voyeurism, doesn't it?

Wolf, are you familiar with ASMR?

I have that. I have sat through countless sales presentations simply because I get the ASMR tingles from them. I have never disclosed "I have ASMR" before the presentation. I am getting a non sexual thrill from them without them knowing it--somehow I don't think you see it as nearly as wrong.

But the sexual part or pseudo-sexual one you do. Which again, to me, is a sign of a sexually repressed mind born of a sexually suppressed society that wants people to be ashamed of their sexuality and urges.

If the act itself is not wrong--as you say before...in a friendly spot where tickling would be acceptable anyway--then yeah, I don't see the problem at all. Because clearly the ACT doesn't bother them.

"But the motivation might bother them..." to me is a paper-thin argument. No one has an automatic right to know your motivations just because they engage in something socially acceptable with you. If they are worried about your motives, they can simply opt-out if thats how they feel. But this quid pro quo full disclosure everytime something MIGHT turn you on, is just stupid, awkward, problematic, and frankly, childish.
 
Wolf, are you familiar with ASMR?

I have that. I have sat through countless sales presentations simply because I get the ASMR tingles from them. I have never disclosed "I have ASMR" before the presentation. I am getting a non sexual thrill from them without them knowing it--somehow I don't think you see it as nearly as wrong.

But the sexual part or pseudo-sexual one you do. Which again, to me, is a sign of a sexually repressed mind born of a sexually suppressed society that wants people to be ashamed of their sexuality and urges.

If the act itself is not wrong--as you say before...in a friendly spot where tickling would be acceptable anyway--then yeah, I don't see the problem at all. Because clearly the ACT doesn't bother them.

"But the motivation might bother them..." to me is a paper-thin argument. No one has an automatic right to know your motivations just because they engage in something socially acceptable with you. If they are worried about your motives, they can simply opt-out if thats how they feel. But this quid pro quo full disclosure everytime something MIGHT turn you on, is just stupid, awkward, problematic, and frankly, childish.

You keep tossing out words like “repressed”, which is ironic, because being open about what I like has gotten me pretty much everything I’ve wanted in that realm. You want to get your thrills off others without their knowledge, that’s your gig. But you can leave off claiming others are “repressed” for liking enthusiastic consent. You’ve got things bass-ackwards.
 
I disagree Wolf. We're all adults here and are responsible for our actions. Nobody's talking about crossing the line and violating someone else's space.
Except that the next comment after yours does exactly that.
 
And, your entire premise seems based on the idea that you are not motivated to share your regular thoughts with someone on why you want something, but are obligated to share sexual thoughts.

Well then you’re wrong. Try re-reading what I wrote maybe. I’m saying you are the one who’s deflecting to the idea of being “ethically obligated to share your sexual thoughts”.


Which I just flat out disagree with. If I get a boner shaking someone's hand--that's not automatically their business as long as the act itself is a socially acceptable one they are ok with. If you are going to try to claim "they might not be ok with it if they knew..." well, then I will simply repeat plenty of the above, and say that's a mentality of a sexually repressed society who acts like seeking thrills is a bad thing. If the person is ok with the act anyway--that's a risk they are taking by doing it.

I would argue if someone would change their mind based on such things, it's more their obligation to ask than the other person's to divulge. Or we can be adults and just accept the potential risk of turning someone on through regular day things and stop being a bunch of weenies over it.


Never said it was their business that you have a boner. I know there's a risk of people being turned on by doing day to day things. I STILL think the OP's scenario of seeking sexual gratification by tickling an unsuspecting friend is tantamount to a copped feel and is ethically wrong.
 
Last edited:
I'm remain confused by some of the comments here. Not sure if it's that I'm misunderstanding, or actually disagreeing.

Ever been to a party or event where people are dancing? The next time a guy asks a girl to dance, should he say, "Would you like to dance? You should know I'm going to find it sexually gratifying if our bodies, on occasion, come up against each other, and I don't want to ever do something for a motivation that includes sexual gratification without declaring that to you up front"?
 
I'm remain confused by some of the comments here. Not sure if it's that I'm misunderstanding, or actually disagreeing.

Ever been to a party or event where people are dancing? The next time a guy asks a girl to dance, should he say, "Would you like to dance? You should know I'm going to find it sexually gratifying if our bodies, on occasion, come up against each other, and I don't want to ever do something for a motivation that includes sexual gratification without declaring that to you up front"?

You're clearly misunderstanding.
 
Wolf, are you familiar with ASMR?

I have that. I have sat through countless sales presentations simply because I get the ASMR tingles from them. I have never disclosed "I have ASMR" before the presentation. I am getting a non sexual thrill from them without them knowing it--somehow I don't think you see it as nearly as wrong.

Getting off on ASMR from someone talking is completely incidental. You have to initiate physical touch and effect someone to "innocently" get a thrill from tickling them. If you were watching them get tickled from a third party and neither of them understood you were getting off on it, that's roughly akin to the ASMR example.
 
Getting off on ASMR from someone talking is completely incidental. You have to initiate physical touch and effect someone to "innocently" get a thrill from tickling them. If you were watching them get tickled from a third party and neither of them understood you were getting off on it, that's roughly akin to the ASMR example.

...to take this analogy and run with it - because people in this community actually do this - it would also be akin to asking people to "practice" their sales presentations for you while you secretly recorded them and uploaded them to PornHub. "Why? Uh... so you can get better at it!"
 
You keep tossing out words like “repressed”, which is ironic, because being open about what I like has gotten me pretty much everything I’ve wanted in that realm. You want to get your thrills off others without their knowledge, that’s your gig. But you can leave off claiming others are “repressed” for liking enthusiastic consent. You’ve got things bass-ackwards.

You're entitled to your opinion. I actually do agree with your base point that being honest about what you like is helpful and has certainly gotten me a lot of fun in my life. But I don't LEAD with it. That's the difference here. I am honest when asked, and after awhile the fact I like it comes out more organically, and more fun--in the same way any interest would in conversation. The, stop the convo up front and give the full disclaimer, like the dance analogy farther down--that's the part that grinds things to a halt and actually is more awkward for people invovled than the actual ACT itself.

I'm guessing you've never had a friendship or relationship where the unspoken truth was that you were both flirting or doing things for a little bit of a sexual thrill but it was part of the unspoken understanding to keep that unspoken? Because if it was put into words it would make it awkward for both parties?

Yeah, I never said humans make sense (just look at this thread) but most of what you guys are advocating for just going plainly against human nature.

As for the enthusiastic consent thing--yeah, nice try to make it creepy--except they ARE consenting to the act itself even if they don't know ALL the motivations behind it. But honestly, as many have states we consent to things every day we don't know all the motivations to.

Feel free to keep doing you. And I will continue to think you guys have unrealistic and childish POVs. I don't hold it against you though, dude.
 
...to take this analogy and run with it - because people in this community actually do this - it would also be akin to asking people to "practice" their sales presentations for you while you secretly recorded them and uploaded them to PornHub. "Why? Uh... so you can get better at it!"

I would say uploading people without permission raises all sorts of other questions of invasion of privacy etc etc. Entirely different conversation than simply tickling a friend who may not know 100% the details of your tickle fetish.

However, parents upload videos of their kids without permission all the time, (while also telling their kids to be careful what they upload, ironic isn't it?) and people seem to not be nearly as upset about that. But if someone uploads a picture of feet in sandals they saw at the beach (without even a face)that are perfectly on display in public... then EVERYONE LOOSES THEIR MIIIIINDS. It's very apparent there is no operational definition of whats good or bad in this scenario and it all comes down to emotional reactions. Which makes things very hard to judge.
 
Getting off on ASMR from someone talking is completely incidental. You have to initiate physical touch and effect someone to "innocently" get a thrill from tickling them. If you were watching them get tickled from a third party and neither of them understood you were getting off on it, that's roughly akin to the ASMR example.

Or someone can touch and tickle you without you disclosing. Usually moreso with me since I am about 70% lee to 30% ler. In my own case, I actually rarely tickle someone who hasn't tickled me first--and if I do it's usually a cheer up tickle or a poke to get a response. Or if other people are already tickling someone I might join in. By the arguments here, I should pause the tickle and give them a contract.

At any given point I have 8-10 tickle partners, none of which I found here at the TMF. It usually starts slow, and leads into more things--usually them taking it to the next level like bondage, etc. Inevitably along the course of this the question or comment on how much I like tickling always comes up and I always give the honest "yeah I like tickling" response. To date, literally no one has ever been upset, and many have become lifelong friends if they weren't already.

My personal philosophy has always been if they start it, it's all fair game. And again, if the social situation dictates it, and they would be fine with it otherwise, then no I don't see the act as a problem. You are free to if you want to. But quite a few people here seem to disagree with it being problematic.
 
Well then you’re wrong. Try re-reading what I wrote maybe. I’m saying you are the one who’s deflecting to the idea of being “ethically obligated to share your sexual thoughts”.





Never said it was their business that you have a boner. I know there's a risk of people being turned on by doing day to day things. I STILL think the OP's scenario of seeking sexual gratification by tickling an unsuspecting friend is tantamount to a copped feel and is ethically wrong.

You are entitled to your opinion. I disagree with it though.
 
You're clearly misunderstanding.

How is he misunderstanding? That is essentially what you all are advocating for in the name of "full disclosure." Thats how it would sound if you took the fetish out of it.
 
Lol, I can't believe this discussion is still going on, and you guys are at each others throats too. Interesting question and thought provoking, but damn.

At the end of the day, who really cares what you do? Whatever is in your head is your own business. If you get off on tickling your friends and they don't know it, who cares? At the end of the day, its tickling. They're not being harmed by it. There are a lot of worse things out there. So long as the tickling doesn't get out of control, you have some type of relationship with said person, and they deem it friendly and innocent, who cares? Many people on this site will be triggered by it, but you do you. As long as no one is being hurt physically, mentally, or emotionally, its okay in my book. And of course as long as the ticklee is okay with it, or deems it playful themselves. Tickling is a friendly playful thing that millions of people do across the world on a daily basis, even when its more for one party.

If it bothers you and you think its morally wrong, then don't do it. Plain and simple.
 
There are some solidly contrasting views here, and about half of them have nothing to do with the question.

1. There is a false dichotomy being set up and worn thin between clandestinely satisfying ones kinky urges and blurting out to someone "Can I tickle you because I'm kinky and tickling is my kink and I want to be aroused by doing the tickle to you." That's nonsense.

2. A lot of comparisons being used in these 5 pages aren't really comparisons. Apt comparisons require that the act in question is commonly accepted in one light and possessed of a special quality or intensity to those with a kink for it - a few examples might be brushing up against someone incidentally on the subway to reach a seat versus doing it intentionally to gratify frotteurism, or buying a gal a puffy jacket as a Christmas gift versus doing it because you have fantasized it as a part of your puffy kink.

3. The assumption that "it happens all the time every day so it must be ethically fine" is invalid. Apply the line of logic to any other socially controversial behavior and it becomes pretty problematic.

4. The argument that "it wouldn't bother me if it happened to me so it is therefore ethical to do to others" is also extremely concerning. I know four people who do not mind and/or enjoy getting kicked in the genitals, but I assume most men in the thread still feel entitled to complain about it being done to them.

Thanks for the thoughts - I'm not trying to mute the conversation, just figured at 5 pages it was time to chime back in.
 
How is he misunderstanding? That is essentially what you all are advocating for in the name of "full disclosure." Thats how it would sound if you took the fetish out of it.

This is the standard BS argument the non-consent crowd always tries to make; that you have to have a contract or state your intentions at every moment, which is just another lame attempt to try and make anyone who gives a shit about respecting others as being somehow out of line. No one's asking you to do that. No one's asking you to stop doing anything; we're just sighing and rolling our eyes at the concept that getting your thrills off touching someone without them knowing that that element is possibly a part of the interaction is something you should be congratulated for.
 
Door 44 Productions
What's New

3/29/2024
The TMF Gathering forums keep you up to date on where and when folk are meeting up.
Tickle Experiment
Door 44
NEST 2024
Register here
The world's largest online clip store
Live Camgirls!
Live Camgirls
Streaming Videos
Pic of the Week
Pic of the Week
Congratulations to
*** brad1701 ***
The winner of our weekly Trivia, held every Sunday night at 11PM EST in our Chat Room
Back
Top