Now before I begin, I want make 2 things perfectly clear. First, before making this post, I went back and carefully reread Todd's initial post and his more recent response, thus proving that I have no life. But I did so in order to make sure that when I speak, I know exactly what I'm talking about. Second, this conversation has gone past the point of insulting my intelligence.
Now frankly, I think people on both sides owe each other an apology. That means Todd (who didn't have anything to apologize about before that carefully crafted response he made earlier in the day) as well as those who have decided to oppose him. The major players in this discussion, at least.
First I'll start with the latter group. As I said, I went back... AGAIN... to look at the initial post. First, let's make sure we know that we are talking about the difference between non-con fantasy scenarios (model willingly consents to making a film that is NOT like Silvercherry's "just tie up the girl and tickle her" clips, but that utilizes a non-consensual scenario in order to cater to non-consensual fantasies, such as Starr being tickled in the Colombian dungeon in one of Tickling Paradise's clips in order to avoid being sent to Colombian prison) depicting the hardcore and intense tickling of a hysterically ticklish girl in tight bondage, and real non-con tickling torture (I grab random girl off the street and tickle her until she wets herself and develops a stuttering problem). At no point did Todd express any desire to perform the latter (real non-con torture), only the former (scenario with a non-con theme and/or tickle torture that sends the model into such hysterics you'd think it was really non-con).
These are scenarios. Tickling Paradise's Starr being in a Colombian dungeon is also a scenario, as is Skelyrata's Emily being a law enforcement officer. Personally I prefer cheerleaders, Arab bellydancers, or girls in formal/prom-esque gowns, but to each his own. OR perhaps he prefers videos akin to what TF2000 posted later, with the guys gang tickling that girl from behind. While that would be technically non-consensual, I don't think anyone with a sane mind would consider that abuse. It's friends goofing around. But that is definitely "real" tickle torture, not staged as when a model signs a contract and arrives at a studio. The word "real" is the real bitch here, because in the phrase "real tickle torture", it could mean a whole lot of things. One should, though, give someone who utters that phrase the benefit of the doubt unless given a reason not to (especially since most of us aren't psycho rapists and aren't referring to some insidious act of molestation when uttering those words). After all, when a producer puts something like, "This is REAL TICKLE TORTURE of a HYSTERICALLY TICKLISH VICTIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" on the description of a video, certainly you don't think that the lee was kidnapped and tortured against her will, do you?
Of course, we don't have interpret Todd request too much. He actually pretty much tells us what he's talking about right in the initial thread:
The plot for the Miranda video was that the girl only thought she was doing a bondage shoot but the ler tickled her instead once she was tied down. Of course, we all know that in real life it was staged, just like professional wrestling. Actually, the video really wasn't that great, in my opinion, but whatever. As for TC Videos, we've all seen enough of TIB's work to know that he doesn't specialize in home invasion. The models are willing and consent to the tickling.
No mention of actual non-consentual illegal torture anywhere.
Now here's the thing. OK, people somehow interpreted this as a request for someone to actually go out, kidnap a girl, actually torture her (real torture, not simply intense tickle torture), and film it for us. How that happened, I don't know, but whatever the case, it happened. Fine. But instead of asking Todd to clarify what he meant by asking him if he was requesting a non-con fantasy video or an actual non-con event, people instead saw fit to attack Todd's character. And those attacks were VICIOUS. Look, I didn't really like Todd's reply at all, and I will get to that in a minute, but to sit there and call him immature.... Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Suddenly everybody's accusing him of everything that's wrong with the universe. Everybody starts going on about how he should look up the assault laws and ask if it's worth it--Who said anything about assault?--or labeling Todd's request as "nothing short of criminal"--Because it's not. That's not what he asked for--to either calling or at least implying that Todd is a "low life sack of shit" who should "die a slow death from cancer"--I'm hoping that I'm being a hypocrite and seeing malicious words where none exist with that one, because WOW!!-- to emphasizing over and over and over and over again that what Todd really wants is to see a girl dragged into the bushes and assaulted, or simply that he "wants a victim, not a lee". And then they wonder why Todd completely lost it.
Even after the work of art that was Todd's reply, people wouldn't stop putting words in his mouth and interpreting things the way they wanted (apparently, he had "clarified" his position, but the position he was accused of clarifying was the opposite of the position he claimed to have). Again, I didn't care for his reply any more than you guys did and felt that it was completely out of line (unless you are a firm believer in Hammurabi's Code, in which case, "an eye for an eye" has already worked its magic). But regardless and staying on topic, he made it more clear that ever that he was not looking for non-con tickling. As a matter of fact:
He wants exactly what I and many others want:
Again, no kidnapping. No children. No assault. No tricks. No non-consent. No trauma. No forced torture.
No problem? No chance........
What strikes me as backwards is the repeated claims that if the tickling request/clip/film/etc. was consensual and the model entered freely, then no one would be passing judgment. But that's all anyone's been doing on this thread since around page 3-ish, and no one has any basis for doing so. I could only imagine what it's like to be accused of such a thing, repeatedly no less. It's like you out of nowhere telling people that this guy over here molests children (though one is far more extreme than the other). Like I said, no one (except Azrael) actually took the time to ask something like "DID he ask for true non-con videos?" Instead, people only took the time to either hurl verbal attacks directly at Todd or to point them at him indirectly in their out-of-nowhere tirades about the dangers of non-consensual tickling, touching children, and so forth. Look, I'm not saying those people meant to do it, I'm not saying that it was done with malicious intent. I'm sure they had the best intentions, but good intentions mean nothing without a basis for accusation. Otherwise it is nothing but a vicious, baseless attack. And whatever your motives or intentions are, know that when you launch a vicious baseless attack, you can expect a vicious baseless reply. Speaking of vicious baseless replies........
Todd. Hi, Todd. Blood pressure back to normal yet? I hope so, because it's your turn. Frankly, I'm going to keep Todd's criticism short, partly because I just don't have the patience for this anymore, partly because my criticism for him is a lot more broad and general, and finally because he only had one offending post.
I was hoping you'd come out and defend yourselves, but from hereon I think you should just tell somebody what you want to say and have them type it out for you. I think your post was unnecessarily vicious and to say your words were uncalled for doesn't quite convey the full meaning of my words. That even applies to the parts I agreed with you on. Somehow, you managed to be more insulting and offensive to those who hurled the accusations at you than they were to you, something I didn't think was possible. Kudos on antagonizing people, but you failed to even come close to convincing people that you weren't a psychopath in dire need of therapy. Let's take a look at where you went wrong:
Actually, things fell apart when you titled your post "stop crying you toothless hick", but I think here is a good place to start. Um, actually there's not much I can really say about this. Those that weren't still directly accusing you of wanting to see an illegal kidnapping in action pretty much said everything. But I will say that to tell someone who was tickled against their will as a child (which in my eyes is child molestation) that no one cares and that there victimization doesn't matter is horrible. Not horrible like Holocaust jokes. I mean just as bad, no, far worse than accusing someone of wanting to take part in the molestation and torture of innocent girls. I just hope I don't have to explain why. Todd, I'm trying to help you out here. All my posts on this thread were in your defense. When you say something like this to someone who was victimized as a child, it diminishes my ability, and desire, to come to your defense.
You might as well have titled the thread, "I want to rape your mother". I think that would have pissed people off less.
Telling people to leave the forum because they don't like the same type of tickling that you like is also messed up. They have every right to be there as much as you or I. And frankly, people with their tickling clip preferences probably have a majority over people with our preferences. Regardless, you just don't do that. It wouldn't be right if they told you to leave because you want to see real intense tickle torture, would it?
The obscene amounts of obscene attacks ("......you are the most obtuse piece of flotsam I've ever seen.") is also a point of contention for me. Here's what you do. Next time you are about to call someone a name, say, a douchebag, then stop.............and that's it. There's very little I can directly say about your post. Like I said, it was your tone more than anything else that really wasn't needed. Watching you name-call was like watching a monkey repeatedly throwing his head against a tree, which in turn is like watching your average junior high school student nowadays trying to use proper grammar. ChosenofMystra got it right. You calling everyone else immature really was the pot calling the kettle black.
I know you probably had every right to go completely psycho on those who repeatedly accused you of requesting non-con material, but that doesn't actually mean you do it! You had nothing to apologize to them for before you made the post, you hadn't said one thing that was wrong, offensive, insensitive, out of line, or anything like that. But then you went and instead of making an intelligent and coherent response, you spat back the same venomous bile that they spat at you in the first place.
Good job with that one. Maybe you should calm down first before you write your next reply.
That's really it, at least for now. So yes, I think certain people owe certain others an apology. And while I'm not naming names (except for Todd, of course), if you are wondering whether you are one of those people, then yes, you owe someone an apology.
And one last thing. If people would freakin' think before they speak, choose their words carefully, not throw their own meaning into other people's words, speak rationally instead of calling names, and stop making snap judgment calls about other people that you are in no position to make, we wouldn't have these sorts of problems. Just watch your words. It's not hard. But from the trends I've been seeing on the TMF lately, I'll give this piece of advice. I'd say this applies to a very high percentage of our members: If you are ever on a thread like this and you are about to say something, it is the wrong thing to say. I don't know what you were going to say, but don't say it. It's a bad idea. Doesn't matter what you were going to say, just don't. Don't. Think about what you are going to say before you say it, and then just move to another thread.
And my final piece of advice: GROW UP!!!!!!!!!!
