Most ticklish ethnicity?

[Jezebel Lee]

Just to add, on a slightly more positive note: I do appreciate that people are finally starting to accept non-white lees. In a way, it does make a nice change from the usual “white girls with blonde hair and blue eyes are more ticklish”. However, I do think we should stop pretending that anyone’s personal preferences are inherently more ticklish and therefore “better” than others.

 

[Elyos]

The existence of this thread makes me roll my eyes. What does ethnicity have to do with tickling?

 

[ChicagoDavid]

My response to Jezebel Lee's reply to my post at 9:55pm:

"“HoW dO yOu KnOw?” I know because I obsessively looked into the science behind tickling as a teenager, long before I was old enough to start engaging with the community. There hasn’t be a lot of research, but there’s literally no evidence whatsoever that ticklishness varies between ethnicity. At all."

MY RESPONSE: You saying you looked into the science, without citing the science, is unpersuasive. If there are studies analyzing whether ticklishness is or is not correlated with ethnicity or gender, please quote them! If there are not, then the absence of any evidence does not suggest that there is no correlation. I expect that there are not, in line with your comment that there hasn't been a lot of research. As a society, we are skittish about looking at race/ethnicity, so there is not much research."

"Strictly speaking there are two types of ticklishness: knismesis and gargalesis. The most common accepted theories are that knismesis evolved to keep us away from bugs, and gargalesis evolved to train youngsters for combat. This evolved across the whole-ass human species. Why would ethnicity play a part? These other features such as lung capacity are dependant on things like environment and climate."

MY RESPONSE: There are plenty of differences based on ethnicity or gender where we don't know why. I think that is because typically, if any researcher want to research such differences, there is a societal anger at touching the subject. Here is an interesting article that at one point asserts that girls do better than boys in all subjects, when accounting for other variables.

https://www.livescience.com/20011-brain-cognition-gender-differences.html

We could have fun, if we are nonjudgmental, at speculating why this would be.

I've seen the arguments about bugs and combat, and personally didn't find those to be persuasive. But if I let my mind roam, I'd wonder whether people living in warmer climates where there are more bugs would be more knismesis-susceptible

"I don’t care if it’s “fun to speculate”; it’s harmful when people allow their “preferences” to develop into straight up racism, especially when it’s not based on any actual facts.

I’m 100% sure people will attack me for saying this but FFS I’ve had enough."

MY RESPONSE: It is not "straight up racism" to wonder whether one group of people is more ticklish than another. Accusing people of being racist for making such a suggestion is the problem I mention earlier. Do you think that the author of the article I cite above is straight up sexist for arguing that girls do better than boys on average? Perhaps you do. I do not. And I'm not attacking you for saying that, but I am saying I disagree.

 

[4Pawz]

As Myriads said, there isn’t one. The data would be subjective and immeasurable. You’re basing information from the Ler’s, or observer’s, perspective and perception. The Lee is really the one experiencing the sensations and reactions. So, why is it always the Ler debating this? As Myriads said, people like to categorize and place traits in a hierarchy for some perceived dominant human. You can’t. It doesn’t exist and it’s immeasurable.

To play devils advocate, you have the problem of how to determine the level of sensitivity. But wait, do we do it based upon sensitivity, or reaction. And how do you decide a reaction determines a sensation or experience? Again, each person is different. Some squeak, squeal, giggle, laugh loudly, scream, cry, thrash, freeze, pull, flop, push, swear, etc. hell some people full on pass out!

It’s not something that can be determined through a valid or reliable study. Humans are humans. All ethnicities will include all of the above. It’s insulting. Not just to ethnicities, but to people as well. We’re not a cow up there for judging at the county fair. We’re people to be appreciated.

 

[ChicagoDavid]

I'm going to bow out of this discussion, simply because I don't care enough about the issue to continue responding. Regrets that some are insulted by the question. But I continue to think that people shouldn't be insulted by the question or so sure they know the answer, and I haven't heard a persuasive argument to the contrary.

 

[JohnTK]

From my personal experience:

1) Latin: most of the latin women I have met sexually, were so extremely sensitive on their feet that it was almost impossible to include it in as a sexual kink. So this is where my vote goes as most ticklish ethnicity.

2) Ukrainians: everyone I have been with was at least moderately or very ticklish. Safest bet..haha

3) Asians: unfortunately even though it is the best visual for me - an asian girl getting tickled, I have met a few that were not ticklish at all and some that were very little and could easily control it. Only one chinese girl that I have been with was over the charts - kick you in the face and break the bonds ticklish.

 

[Jezebel Lee]

My response to Jezebel Lee's reply to my post at 9:55pm:

"“HoW dO yOu KnOw?” I know because I obsessively looked into the science behind tickling as a teenager, long before I was old enough to start engaging with the community. There hasn’t be a lot of research, but there’s literally no evidence whatsoever that ticklishness varies between ethnicity. At all."

MY RESPONSE: You saying you looked into the science, without citing the science, is unpersuasive. If there are studies analyzing whether ticklishness is or is not correlated with ethnicity or gender, please quote them! If there are not, then the absence of any evidence does not suggest that there is no correlation. I expect that there are not, in line with your comment that there hasn't been a lot of research. As a society, we are skittish about looking at race/ethnicity, so there is not much research."

"Strictly speaking there are two types of ticklishness: knismesis and gargalesis. The most common accepted theories are that knismesis evolved to keep us away from bugs, and gargalesis evolved to train youngsters for combat. This evolved across the whole-ass human species. Why would ethnicity play a part? These other features such as lung capacity are dependant on things like environment and climate."

MY RESPONSE: There are plenty of differences based on ethnicity or gender where we don't know why. I think that is because typically, if any researcher want to research such differences, there is a societal anger at touching the subject. Here is an interesting article that at one point asserts that girls do better than boys in all subjects, when accounting for other variables.

https://www.livescience.com/20011-brain-cognition-gender-differences.html

We could have fun, if we are nonjudgmental, at speculating why this would be.

I've seen the arguments about bugs and combat, and personally didn't find those to be persuasive. But if I let my mind roam, I'd wonder whether people living in warmer climates where there are more bugs would be more knismesis-susceptible

"I don’t care if it’s “fun to speculate”; it’s harmful when people allow their “preferences” to develop into straight up racism, especially when it’s not based on any actual facts.

I’m 100% sure people will attack me for saying this but FFS I’ve had enough."

MY RESPONSE: It is not "straight up racism" to wonder whether one group of people is more ticklish than another. Accusing people of being racist for making such a suggestion is the problem I mention earlier. Do you think that the author of the article I cite above is straight up sexist for arguing that girls do better than boys on average? Perhaps you do. I do not. And I'm not attacking you for saying that, but I am saying I disagree.

Boy, you’re really adamant that some ethnicities are more ticklish (and therefore inherently “better”) than others. It’s not my job to educate you, but you’re more than welcome to Google any links between race and ticklishness yourself. Why don’t you share a few sources yourself about which race is most ticklish? Because as it currently stands, you’re saying my statements are invalid without evidence, while also providing none of your own.

As for this part:

It is not "straight up racism" to wonder whether one group of people is more ticklish than another.

No, it’s not racism to wonder about evolutionary links in a nuanced, unbiased manner. It is racism to class certain races / ethnicities as objectively “better” than others. As mentioned above, people in this community equate “more ticklish” with “inherently better” and “less ticklish” with some kind of lower value.

And I’m sorry if I came across as harsh or whatever, but do you guys have any idea how much shit I’ve gotten in this community for being a non-white lee? It really takes a toll on a person, and myths about how I’d be “more ticklish” or “less ticklish” than anyone else, solely because I’m not white, aren’t going to help! How about looking past skin colour, background, etc. and valuing people as individuals?

Also, just to add: I am by far not the only person in this thread who doesn’t believe there’s a link between ethnicity and ticklishness. So it’s not a case of you vs me, it’s a case of you vs multiple people in this thread.

 

[Cave In]

Being ticklish is a human trait, ethnicity is irrelevant. Simple as that.

 

[ChicagoDavid]

Boy, you’re really adamant that some ethnicities are more ticklish (and therefore inherently “better”) than others. It’s not my job to educate you, but you’re more than welcome to Google any links between race and ticklishness yourself. Why don’t you share a few sources yourself about which race is most ticklish? Because as it currently stands, you’re saying my statements are invalid without evidence, while also providing none of your own.

As for this part:
No, it’s not racism to wonder about evolutionary links in a nuanced, unbiased manner. It is racism to class certain races / ethnicities as objectively “better” than others. As mentioned above, people in this community equate “more ticklish” with “inherently better” and “less ticklish” with some kind of lower value.

And I’m sorry if I came across as harsh or whatever, but do you guys have any idea how much shit I’ve gotten in this community for being a non-white lee? It really takes a toll on a person, and myths about how I’d be “more ticklish” or “less ticklish” than anyone else, solely because I’m not white, aren’t going to help! How about looking past skin colour, background, etc. and valuing people as individuals?

Also, just to add: I am by far not the only person in this thread who doesn’t believe there’s a link between ethnicity and ticklishness. So it’s not a case of you vs me, it’s a case of you vs multiple people in this thread.

Sigh. Not only am I not "really adamant, " but actually, I never once said that some ethnicities are more ticklish than others. I said that the question has not been studied scientifically, so we do not know. Nothing anyone has said, including you, rebuts that point. The fact that a number of people have said that they disagree does not make my point incorrect.

Nor did I ever say, or imply, that if one gender or ethnicity is more ticklish, that makes them "superior" or more valued as an individual. One race is taller, on average, than another. Men are taller than women, on average. It is not racist or sexist to say that. It is a fact. Taller is not "superior." It is just different. Being more ticklish does not make that person superior, either.

I am sorry if you have taken shit for being a non-white lee. I am surprised and disappointed (and actually, perplexed) to hear that, and you have every right to be angry at those people. However, I am not one of the people who did that. I think you're gorgeous and I'm amazed that anyone on this site would have anything negative to say about you as a lee.

 

[Jezebel Lee]

Sigh. Not only am I not "really adamant, " but actually, I never once said that some ethnicities are more ticklish than others. I said that the question has not been studied scientifically, so we do not know. Nothing anyone has said, including you, rebuts that point. The fact that a number of people have said that they disagree does not make my point incorrect.

Nor did I ever say, or imply, that if one gender or ethnicity is more ticklish, that makes them "superior" or more valued as an individual. One race is taller, on average, than another. Men are taller than women, on average. It is not racist or sexist to say that. It is a fact. Taller is not "superior." It is just different. Being more ticklish does not make that person superior, either.

I am sorry if you have taken shit for being a non-white lee. I am surprised and disappointed (and actually, perplexed) to hear that, and you have every right to be angry at those people. However, I am not one of the people who did that. I think you're gorgeous and I'm amazed that anyone on this site would have anything negative to say about you as a lee.

Thank you, I appreciate that.

 

[omnifeller]

Ah, another good ol' race fetish thread. Gives me the ick.

 

[-Venom-]

I don't understand how this subject can keep cropping up. There isn't even the slightest reason to think that one race/nationality/ethnicity is more ticklish than any other. Nobody has enough "personal experience" to come up with any kind of reliable average.

This pretty much sums it up, it depends on the individual person, not race, not hair color, not how many eyes someone has, not anything. Every individual person is different

 

[BlueLine7045]

Being ticklish is a human trait, ethnicity is irrelevant. Simple as that.

animals are ticklish too

 

[Cave In]

animals are ticklish too

...Yea? I didn't say it was exclusive to humans.