A Question for the Guys...Please be honest.

[kingofswing]

totally possible

I definitely think it is possible and have found it in my own life. My girlfriend Lexi is gorgeous and I am attracted to her in every way possible, from the calculated to the spontaneous excitement. AND she happens to be super ticklish, loves it and is wild about sex.

But to the answer the other part of the question: I do think it's weird if someone proclaimed their love for another, but yet did not find them physically attractive or stimulating. To me, that is the difference between dating and friendship...the attraction. I have plenty of female friends that I love with all my heart, but I don't feel that sexual attraction to them. That's why we are friends and I never asked them out on a date.

And maybe I'm in the minority or a bad guy...but no, I couldn't date someone I was not physically attracted to. They don't have to be a "model" or whatever that even means (those women in tickle videos and such are real people. They have lives that go on after the cameras shut off and some, I'm sure, are wonderful people looking for, or involved in, real relationships), I just have to be attracted to them.

 

[dvnc]

Nightfall, are you asking if I'd want a lover that I didn't find physically attractive?

I don't expect that I'd fall in love with a woman that didn't attract me. That's sorta the way relationships progress beyond friendship, for me. Without the physicality of it, it's a friendship. I've many friends who are women, who I believe to be attractive ladies, yet they're not my lover, and there's no competing with my lover. That's also not an option with me. I chose who I chose, and stand by my choice.

Thus, I agree wit' shipshirt in that regard

Are you then asking if I view models the same way I view my lover?

I view models as models. Video models, TV models, magazine models, et al, are models, and thus not potentially intimate. There are exceptions, I'm told, but I've no notion of them. It's as rational as attracting to musicians just 'cause they're on stage. Happened to me all the time when I was still performin', and I still don't understand it. My lover is my lover, and the others are others. I'll take her over others, and have. Figure I will for life.

What? Not everyone can do this? Not surprising. I can, and did. Perhaps I'm the exception, but I don't feel so very exceptional. She was attractive to me. Wasn't anything about her that WASN'T attractive to me.

What attracts individuals isn't as common as is generally perceived, though. Many who like me, here, don't like aspects about me that others here find amusing or interesting. The attractors, and their reasons, are very particular to the given man. I suspect the same is true for women, as what I'm told by 'em is the same. Some look for a looker, some for a rich guy, some for a smart guy, etc. Depends on the woman, just like it depends on the man.

We are a diverse species that way.

Another $0.02,

dvnc

 

[46and2]

Can you envision being in a long-term relationship, regardless of your partner's physical stature, without a strong physical attraction present? In other words, you love her, need her, care of her, but physically there is no spontaneous arousal or desire.

I have before and I would do it again. Guess what? No matter how good they look now they're going to be wrinkled, bent, and destroyed in a matter of time and so will I. You know what else? My dick eventually won't be working and she will cease to have orgasms in her old age. Looks are not only decieving but are also fleeting. Spontaneous arousal will go away eventually, even if the plumbing is properly functioning. So yes I would if the person underneath the skin was an awesome individual (at least in my eyes). In the relationship I mentioned in my earlier response to this thread, I was not, I repeat, NOT physically attracted to her whatsoever. Was I spontaneousley aroused? No. I wanted to make it work because I loved her, so it took a bit of "work" before arousal even happened.

 

[areenactor]

i think some folks have gotten away from the question

that was originally asked. since others are coming back for seconds, i will too. if a man loves a woman, (as a husband loves a wife)then it is normal that he finds her sexy, and arousing. if he isn't aroused by her, then there is a problem in the relationship.
what the two individuals look like should be an aside. if the womans looks are an obsticle, then the mans feelings are not truely love. a man can care for a woman, and not be sexual with her, but that's not love, nor what jen first proposed in her question!
one last thing is; jen not all men need to be in a sexual/loving relationship with "model type" women. if that were the case, then only models would be married, and having kids.
steve

 

[Dave2112]

I can only speak for myself here, and I don't claim to have the "right" answer. For me, it is very important to have a strong physical relationship, i.e. both into tickling. It's such a large part of my psyche that a non-ticklephile would bore me after awhile. Not because of any fault of her own, but from a compatibility standpoint. As much as we'd like to all be politically correct, I'll put my neck out there and state that a partner of mine needs to excite me in that way. Not that it would be the sole basis of a relationship...not by a long shot...but sex (and to me, tickling is a part of sex) is an important factor in any relationship.

I'm lucky in having found not only a soul-mate, but a fellow ticklephile as well, sexy, attractive and creative. Who says life doesn't work out occasionally?

 

[P50]

Hope This Isn't Too Much

<I><B>njjen3953 wrote:</B> "... physically excites you as much as a tickling video model, but also has the qualities you look for in a woman..." </I>

Does your question assume that most tickling video models are exciting ? I promise you that few of them excite me; indeed most don't excite me much at all. They are [1] far too young and [2] far too uhhhhh, "curvy" and [3] there is continual (and nauseating) emphasis on false cinematographic perfection of the facial features with attempted makeup which ruins a perfectly fine woman who looks okay the way she is (i.e., normal). I swear they must run ads asking first for their bra size, and then call in these idiotic "glamour make-over experts" who will invariably turn the poor girl into a space alien. Normal girls are the best girls.



<I><B>Myriads wrote </B> Physical attraction is but lust expressed as the desire to covet the pretty. </I>

Fancy words, but I do pretty much applaud the concept.

Besides, if that's the basis of attraction, then she'll be out of the picture the next time another "better" looking gal walks by.

Her general physical health/shape and her brains are the two items that will attract me, and her total character as an individual woman are what will keep me returning for the second date (and third and fourth and...).

After those preliminary factors have been established, <I>then</I> let's see if we can excite each other. A hollywood face is nearly a disqualification. I like normal looking earth women.

That physical attraction is <I>not</I> "lustful". It is a form of love called <I>eros</I> in the Greek language (English is pathetically lacking in its precision here). When eros is the central basis of a couple's desire, and spawns the rest of the relationship, you will be divorced (if the two of you ever make it to the altar). Believe me, fifty million divorce attorneys can't be wrong.



<I><B>Flatfoot wrote:</B> "...qualities to lead to physical attraction for me, and not the other way around..." </I>

If the women over the age of 30 who are interested in landing a husband could only understand that.

I've heard many older men tell me that women are "wired differently" and "don't think that way", and they've told me that with conviction and certainty to the point that I don't attempt to argue with them.

Will I ever know for sure ?



<I><B>TickledToDeath wrote: </B>"... found her, right here in the TMF! ... Not to mention she is INSANELY ticklish and loves both tickling and being tickled! </I>

QUIT GLOATING IN PUBLIC !!!



<I><B>amk714 wrote: </B>"... the qualities I'm looking for would excite me in many ways, provided she's reasonably attractive, perhaps even average-looking. ..."</I>

By hollywood's standards, I want "average looking or worse". The more the girl looks like a hollywood "beauty", the worse she will be in terms of character. Attention young guys ! Go for the plain ordinary looking girls ! They're better; waaay better. (What's more, they get better looking with age while the walking bombshells get uglier; ask your own Dad and uncles if this is true.)



<I><B>pantsonfire wrote: </B> Sure. Physical attractiveness isn't as important as the fact that she's ticklish, and she's willing to be tied down and tickled.</I>

May we all on the TMF unanimously endorse this concept ?



<I><B>terorizer wrote:</B> "... mental, intellectual, spiritual and emotional compatability in a woman breeds physical attractiveness and excitement...."</I>

Hey gals, pay attention.



<I><B>WorkInProgress wrote: </B>"...don't let the Hollywood images tell you what you should find sexually attractive ..." </I>

Give me an A+ on that assignment !



<I><B>keith940 wrote: </B> "yes and i married her...."</I>

You too Keith ! QUIT GLOATING IN PUBLIC !

Oh, by the way, welcome to the TMF



<I><B>TicklingDuo (Ann) wrote:</B> Leaving tickling out of the equation, would your responses be the same? </I>

I doubt I'd respond. Besides, why are we all (you and me included) here in the first place ?

Isn't Dating the time to establish the knowledge of the tickling interest ? Looks like it worked for Mr. And Mrs. keith940 quite well.



<I><B>MaxSpeer wrote: </B> "... Most of the tickling models ..." </I> and a lot of other words which I thouroughly applaud, mainly because I feel similarly; indeed I take it even further.

I don't want to tickle a woman, I don't want to touch her, and I don't even want to be alone with her until <I>after</I> I know more about her, not the least of which are brains and emotions and opinions and character. If it isn't going to work, let's not start the flames of physical desire. Those flames will have all the time they need later.



<I><B>BigJim wrote: </B>"...a guy could not relate to someone he's in love with, but could to a model on a video; I'd say there was deep emotional or mental issues at large ..."</I>

More applause.

Gals ? You got a boyfriend like the guy BigJim is describing ? Run away, and run away <B>now</B> !



<I><B>Nightfall wrote: </B> "...Okay, guys, you've proven your sensitive side ..."</I> and got down to some brass tacks, and yes, the physical body is a factor in physical attraction. So yes, shape counts. No, I may not like that fact, but I'm not going to write a bunch of "sensitive male" words to bluff it off. So yes, general health and shape are <I>a part</I> of attraction, but they aren't sufficient in and of themselves to hold a life of affection and devotion.



<I><B>BigJim wrote:</B> "...I am VERY attracted to the thought of going out with someone plain looking if she is on my wavelength..."</I>

Fair use doctrine, BigJim; No copyright lawsuits when I draft my ad for the personals section on the TMF.

It's the normal looking women who are <I>always</I> the best at everything else. I mean <I>always</I> as in 100% of the time.



<I><B>njjen3953 wrote:</B> It is apparent that women and men really do see things totally differently.</I>

Maybe those old guys who lectured me were right.



<I><B>shipshirt wrote:</B> no, I couldn't date someone I was not physically attracted to.</I>

If she's not physically <I><B>un</B></I>attractive to me, she's acceptable. There is a tendency in our society to have this ridiculous "cut-off" point for attraction, and set it somewhere along the movie-star group. I say the cut-off point should be moved to those who don't really repulse you; i.e., well over half the female population should be considered "attractive" instead of the 0.0001% of the females who comprise the subset of (so-called) gorgeous babes. That opens your horizons by something like ten times more than what it would be if you fall for the media's lie.

I would estimate that 70 to 80 percent of the women I know are in that group, as far as purely physical attributes alone are concerned.



<I><B>Dave2112 wrote: </B>"...it is very important to have a strong physical relationship, i.e. both into tickling. ... Not that it would be the sole basis of a relationship...not by a long shot..." </I>

Fair use doctrine again. That's going in my ad.

Yes indeed, the strong enticing physical relationship is important because with it, the two people <I>will</I> be coming back together again repeatedly, and without it, they will be continually looking elsewhere. Add in the tickling factor (well, for those of us in this community) and you've got quite a strong lock on each other.

And no, without the other factors (like adequate employment and emotional stability and behavior with banks, the law, food, housekeeping, the neighbors, the in-laws, yard care, domestic responsibility, attitudes toward alcohol, television habits, and about 37 other factors) tickling alone won't keep the couple together.

Wo ! This is a very long post. Hope it doesn't break the rules or anything.

 

[kingofswing]

Yup

And that's exactly what I wrote P50. I could not be with someone *I* did not find attractive (which was one of the questions asked). I placed no "societal judgement" on the level of attractiveness. As long as I am sexually attracted to the person, then that's all that matters to me.

And I am VERY attracted to Lexi Doodles, my current (and hopefully for the long haul) girlfriend!

 

[P50]

Excellent response, shipshirt.

If you'd like, I'll go back and edit my post and remove the reference to your post.

I'm <I>really</I> sorry I tagged you with the wrong interpretation.

The original wording of your post came across to me like so many of the media mind washed masses who have the one-percent mentality; i.e., only the "best" one percent are any good. ("Best" according to the media; of course)

Thanks for clarifying. I can't tell you how much I hate assigning the wrong attitude to the wrong person.

Just ask, and I'll edit the post and zap the parts about you.

 

[P50]

You know, this thread has really gone off the topic.

Original questions...

<I>"...Is it possible..." </I>

Probably not.

<I>"...Would you even want to..."</I>

Goodness yes. That would be a gift from God (and I would treat her as such).

The tangents started flying (I suspect) because the stated question appears to be assuming that all/every/most guys (including TMF'ers) want the so-called "gorgeous" hollywood type.

Yeah, that's it; here's the incindiary section...

<I>"... that physically excites you as much as a tickling video model,..." </I>

For many of us, that <I>"...as much as..."</I> is often close to zero, which from that point on leads to a conversation that can get sort of ridiculous, I guess.

I wonder: Guys go on the defensive and don't answer the question directly, because to do so would validate the underlying assumption, which may be inferred as a very subtle insult and false categorization. Hence, Tangent-O-Rama. I wonder.

More psychology of tickling. Weird.

 

[Oddjob0226]

Hey, Jenn...

Well, let's see....speaking ONLY for myself....

Most women in tickling videos I find to be pretty, even beautiful. But that isn't what "does it" for me. It's the tickling.

I'll deal with affection in a moment... If I just wanted a traditionally pretty lady to inspire my lusts I could get regular porn. Tickling's my "thing". I've seen some real....trying to be nice here.... non traditional beauties that, because of the tickling, I would be interested in getting to know further in real life if such a thing were possible. While the beach bunny being tickled greatly interestst me, there have been some very intreaguing "regular" women in videos that interest me as well, beyond the scope of lust. And some that don't. But, in answer to the 1st basic question, could I be interested in someone in these videos who sexually arrouses me, blah blah... well,most of the timethese videos don't so much arouse me. And when they do, its the woman AND the tickling, not just the foxy chick. And not every foxy chick (to me) has the model look. So the answer, well, MY answer, beaks the question down a little. Is it possible to have a relationship with these women? I'm sure it's possible, and I KNOW it's unlikely.

Now, having said that, the embarrasing confession is that given the choice between sex and tickling, I think I'd rather chose tickling. Maybe I have issues with sex from my Victorian family. Maybe I saw how sex really screwed up peoples lives in high school and I have issues. Maybe having had it and realizing the mystique - and the payoff - it became clear that it's really overrated. I mean, in the big picture, it all happens so fast, there's no souveniers and it makes you SO tired! Maybe my sex drive is lower because of the prescriptions I take. Whatever it is, I don't really look for sex, don't really need it and don't particularly miss it when is isn't there. I really, really like affection, though. And in my perverted mind I connotate tickling with affection. Even in my cruelest fantasies where affection has no place (kidnapping scenarios, actual tickling torture, that kind of thing) I've never really imagined tickling involving someone I disliked & have never dealt with such a thing in real life. If I don't like the person, I don't want to touch 'em.

Now, having said THAT, if I could get someone like the beauties in the tickling videos, and who was into tickling, and who had an interest in me and we were compatiable, of course I could be with that person. I would not question it, I'd just be very thankful. Kick Ashlee Rennee out of my bed? Certainly not! That redheaded lady whom I forget the name of from RealTickling? Nonsense! Farrah from MTP? Balderdash & bollocks! I'm just not EXPECTING that this is going to happen.

And, yes, I think a few of the others posters are right. While men can separate sex & love in a bad sense (IE, have sex with someone we don't love), we can also do it in a more positive sense (care deeply for someone & not need sex from them). Then there's those odd uncomfortable in-betweens where A.) we do care deeply for a woman and we love her enough that we don't need sex (or, you know, tickling) from her.... but wouldn't mind if she offered it, and of course my friend Cynthia won't, but I'm still Cynthia's friend reguardles, so I cope and... I've said too much. or B.) We care about a woman deeply and are physically attracted but she wants sex from us but we're just not interested in that with her. Don't know if I'd call that "healthy", but it happens. I've been there. But again, it may be a family/high school/medication thing. Who am I, Dr. Ruth?

 

[BigJim]

That redheaded lady whom I forget the name of from RealTickling?

I think you might be thinking about Sierra Baynes mate. She was the red-headed, emaciated one who did a lot of work with Priscilla James. (Well maybe emaciated is too strong a word to use, but Gawd, I ain't never seen a girl so thin!) She's one of my favourite models too, because of her always trying to hold the giggles in out of embarrassment and failing miserably. lol Come to think, she's also a mean tickler herself, as evidenced in her video Dr. Baynes which I very happily own. Only wish I'd seen TIB get a crack at her though...... If she had done oral foot tickling like Priscilla did, I think she'd have been a better tickler than her too.

 

[Oddjob0226]

Thanks for the help, BigJim! Actually, it was Priscilla James I was thinking of......

 

[shotglass8]

honest reaction

Completely honest, I don't think a tickling video model would ever be as exciting as someone REAL and into something forever with me.

Mike

 

[crydun]

Nice Job Guys!!!!!!

Hello from OH!

first of all, let me say I'm very impressed with the comments on this topic. As a woman, and a plus-sized one at that, I am relieved to hear these things from you. Thanks to Jen for posting this thread!!!

shotglass_8: oh, I love you, I love you, I love you for saying that!!! Makes me even more at ease about meeting in January. I Can't wait!!!!!!!!!! and my tickle kit is ready and waiting for you!!!!

all the rest of the guys on here: I'm putting you all on a talk show to bring back the popularity of the "normal girl" image. It needs to happen. Just because I don't wear a size two don't mean I can't love you to pieces...........and do a good job of it!

ticklishly yours,

crydun

 

[Tenter]

I didn't think so till I met my wife. Now I can tell you that it is indeed possible. I,m happily married and my wife is as ticklish as any model i've seen.

 

[shotglass8]

Thanks crydun

That was awesome crydun, thanks
I can't wait to meet ya either.

 

[jeffdp]

Do I think.....

Yeah I think it's very possible. In fact I just did it !!!!

I married a stunning young blonde (damn I'm lucky) who doesn't seem to mind being tickled (sort of sometimes).

 

[RichardAuc]

Do you think it is possibe or would you even want to find a life partner that physically excites you as much as a tickling video model, but also has the qualities you look for in a woman for an LTR?

Jen

I find it possible that I might find such a life partner, certainly. Some of the members of the message board have found such partners, so I might be so lucky. I would certainly want to do so, as well. Like many ticklephiles, a disinterest in tickling is a dealbreaker for me. I also want a woman I can trust, and I don't think those qualities need be mutually exclusive. Trust must exist between ler & lee in order for a relationship to work, sexual or romantic.

I admit that the models to which you refer excite me, of course; else they'd not be very effective models. They excite me because of what they do, not how they look. Anybody who's seen these videos from even a couple of companies will tell you the models don't all look perfect, or even look alike. Show me any tickling video company, and there will be some seen as more attractive than others. Fact of life.

My perspective naturally differs from some on this point: Appearances are irrelevant. I came to this conclusion through my experience, just as others have come to other conclusions through theirs. My experience involves coping w/visual impairments for much of my life, but when my vision improved I saw the people I'd known before. You know what? They were still the same people.

It's a commonly held misperception that in order to be an attractive person, you have to look good. I feel sorry for the people who think so, and wish they could take a walk w/me after dark sometime. They might be surprised by what they hear.

 

[SkyMaster2]

*pops his head up from lurkdom*

My story is almost identical to keith940. Just figured I'd say it. And I will say that the attractiveness I have towards her after five years together is more of a deep love than the physical attractiveness, though that NEVER stopped. She's so adorable.

 

[kwildoctr]

Yes & yes, Jen. (See TTD's response for, basically, a carbon copy of my feelings; re: my LTR person & future wife, lite).

R

 

[meteorburst]

Your question is intriguing. Simply stated, yes. With me, it can happen. However, I do believe that beauty is common. It takes more than just looks. It’s almost as if there’s a difference between beauty, and being beautiful. Beauty might be thought of as single dimensional –that video model for example. By that individual’s appearance, they can attempt to stimulate the natural inner workings of our imagination to consider the possibilities of this attraction being real to you and bring to you a level of excitement. Most of us cannot get to know the individual, which precludes having any truly fulfilling meaning in our lives other than fantasy. Being beautiful could be thought of as having a beauty quotient, made up of many different facets and personality –you can become connected to this person on a multi-dimensional level. If you think about someone who you really really like, someone who made you feel like....you just want to be swept off your feet, and someone who really knew what they were doing....and make you feel that excitement over and over again, and you could imagine a time in the future, looking back on this moment as having been the start of it, I think that’s what’s truly amazing!. With me, I think it’s something you can enjoy on multiple levels. It’s real, things you can only truly experience with a real person....excitement, passion, adventure. I think that goes beyond what a model can do.