The Convolution In The Construction Of Classification Nomenclature?
Has even the tickling community become so myopically homogenized by "Political Correctness" (in language usage) that some us no longer have "skin thick enough" to look past stereotypical connotations long enough to impart a richly and mutually beneficial gradual transition to mutual acceptance as opposed to mutual exclusion?
I guess I should take heart in the fact that someday I will eventually have to have the same dialog with someone self-proclaimed to be intern the the D/s community who similarly makes paranoid attempts to deny the connection to D/s play as it relates to one of its "component branches," namely, tickle play (if I may paraphrase you a bit here, please, bella...thank you).
In the meantime, I think it would be interesting to reflect on some of the sentiments of a prior thread (sorry the link to that archive escapes me at this moment) that our dear friend and moderator DVNC made thoughtful posts to, resulting in the onset of some establishment of "PC" protocol when referring to folks such as the inhabitants of this forum.
So...what new apartheid mindset does this already beleagured community have to look forward to next? For example, in the aforementioned thread DVNC asserted (after thoughtful and laborious research on the topic) that the psychology community would classify the interest level of most here in tickling as a "paraphilia," whereas some found that term to be "too clinical" in that context to afford the use of that term and they prefer to refer to their affinity for tickling as an "interest." I don't suppose I'd have to look very far to find a "tickling enthusiast" here that would even be offended by having their affinity for tickling to be referred to as a form of the word "enthusiasm." (Did I coin yet ANOTHER offensive term here in my application of the words "affinity" or "enthusiast?" Spare me, please!
)
I guess what I am about to say next might belong in the "General Forum" were it not relevent to the topic at hand (which I will soon establish to the satisfaction of most here), but if the U.S. is developing a serious problem in this day in age I, for one, vote we overcome the "blight" imparted by "PC" on the mentality and morality of our otherwise great nation.
In summary? I feel MANY of us here in the tickling community need to "get over ourselves a bit" and grow some harder bark. We've become way too "touchy-feely." For example, eventhough I proclaim I am a "Dominant" in other forums which would appreciate and expect such a proclamation, I would not be offended if someone referred to me or simply assumed (albeit, in error) that I was a "submissive." (Which happens often, due to stereotypical characterizations of "vanilla"-society-based-mindsets which promote the homologous notion that ALL MEN are submissive if one learns they have a taste for D/s play). Rather, I would politely and courteously make a cursory attempt to set the record straight. If I were met with insensitivity and/or further ignorance of my preferences, I would simply discontinue the conversation.
I guess my hope for the impetus of blurring that "schism" was fueled by the many fine folks I have met in this community who have true "acceptance" and emancipation from the fetters of rash judgement and preconceived notions containing little or no basis on fact or actual experience. And some people wonder why I am so pragmatic about human nature that I seem a "pessimist" on first inspection. Read this thread and wonder no more. Mystery solved.
I am now inclined to agree with TTD and njjen...summarily that our confidence in human nature was misplaced on a too large a contingent in this forum to ever impart a greater good on this benevolent and peace seeking intiative.
Happy Holidays...at at time of year when peace is supposed to be at the forefront, I can't remember when we have been placed further from that objective.
Be well, tickle, and/or be tickled...let the flames continue, if they must, I guess.
