Sensualswitch10
Verified
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2016
- Messages
- 2,524
- Points
- 38
Because I have a tickling fetish not an acting fetish.
^This
Because I have a tickling fetish not an acting fetish.
I guess in answer to the question, we want to see a glimpse into something real. Tickling is seen as some sort of uncontrolable reflex reaction to certain sensations, and that is what we want to see. If there is a perception of it not being a completely natural reaction then we can feel cheated, and lied too. As if our desires are being manipulated. We refer to tickle "models" and not "stars" or "actors", as if the concept of them performing a role for money is somehow taboo. The reality is that not everyone is deathly, bucking-bronco ticklish, and not every session involves somebody getting tickled "out-of their mind". If we accept that, then maybe we will be more satisfied with the results that come from professional videos, even if they are hamming it up a bit.
To primetime: To not get much out of a RARE, underline rare ticklish reaction does not make someone any less appreciative of tickling, and it doesn't mean that we can't tell that somebody is FAKING. But more importantly, if you just stand there while being tickled without reacting, that's not "faking" or poor acting, it's a different topic altogether. Saying that we don't appreciate poor acting does not mean that we don't appreciate unique reactions. We're allowed to call out a lie or a poor job. And frankly, very out of the ordinary reactions, while possible, are widely accepted as rare, and to see the same goofy acting in so many videos is no coincidence. It spoils it for a lot of people. If calling hokey acting for what it is spoils it for you, then maybe you shouldn't be reading reviews. But don't attack people for having some sense, that's just plain abusive.
I mean, if we believe that we really have "no way of knowing" that a person is really ticklish or not, then what's the point of tickling them? How could we enjoy not knowing? To relate to people, we have to associate the physical sensations of others with SOMETHING in order to recognize when it's happening. Otherwise, to the average person's mind, somebody is just being touched. Much like pain, we look for certain reactions to know that something is "wrong". The tickling response is supposed to be a developed mechanism to save our lives from something crawling on us by getting it off. For a person tickling, there is a certain reaction that serves as a confirmation that a person's body does react to touch that way. No disrespect intended, if someone is perceptively challenged or emotionally blind and the only way they can know that you're tickling someone is to be TOLD "that tickled", that's fine. And if a person is not psychologically capable of reacting to touch a certain way, that's fine. But most of us sense and experience tickling for what it is, an instinctive mechanism that serves a life saving mechanism to get something crawling on you off, and as a result has certain reaction. That's not personal taste, that's human. Shoot, many animals react that way too and therefore are only capable of enjoying tickling. That's why being "ticklish" is defined as having a common reaction, not a personal one, because the reaction mostly serves a specific purpose.
If a person has a different/arguably ineffective survival response to tickling, they're no less than anyone, they're still a human being and not being ticklish doesn't make them less well off. But many of us might not wired to recognize or enjoy that reaction. If we can sense their reacting, I imagine one might stop if we can't tell that we're causing them discomfort or not. But IF you have some intuition, usually you can. But if doesn't hurt to communicate to be safe.
And if somebody's reaction to tickling doesn't bring you pleasure for that or any other reason, there are unlimited other ways to make that person smile, laugh and be happy. I think that I value my ability to make a woman laugh from my jokes more than their reaction to laugh when tickled. The fact that anybody genuinely smiles or is happy means more in the long run than their reaction to touch.
You don't know. Just like I can't prove they are in fact ticklish, you can't prove they are faking. That's the entire point. But people think they do know and that is what I am calling out.
If this is truly what you are calling out, what's the point of even asking the question? As someone mentioned earlier, people tend to want authenticity over something fake. Just because someone can't prove with 100% certainty that something is fake doesn't mean they can't use their intuition, past experiences, visual cues and other forms of recognition to come to a determination that a video is most likely fake. Could they be wrong? Of course! No one can actually determine with 100% certainty that someone is faking without asking the person directly, and that's only if they decide to tell the truth.
If we had to get 100% certainty before making decisions in life, we would end up wasting a lot of time. For example, someone may approach you in an attempt to get to know you romantically and you might decide based on their first impression of them that they aren't a good fit for you. Could you be wrong? Yes but we don't always have time to validate every decision we make.
The reality is that tickling has always been associated with laughter (because it is the most common reaction) and more importantly is a uncontrollable response. Now, there are other reactions of course, but laughter is the most common and it's not even close. The person you described that doesn't move in response to being tickled simply isn't ticklish, because not moving isn't a reaction. You're describing tickling as if there's no such thing as a person that isn't ticklish, and I don't think that's the intention since you aren't outright saying that fake videos don't exist.
Then you are not understanding my point. There are people on this forum who post that someone is faking AS FACT. Not speculation. Not "most likely" fake, they state as fact, the person is faking when watching a video. Now, doesn't that seem completely silly?
The other problem is people focus so much on what is fake or what is not, that they lose sight of the video. Just enjoy the video. Since you will never know for certain if the model is faking or not, just enjoy what you are seeing. But if all you focus on is the model is not reacting the way YOU want her/him to react, then you are going to drive yourself insane and get disappointed all the time. Just like if you want to watch a woman orgasm via sex, or even tickling, you damn well know there could be fake orgasms or real ones, but do you focus on if it is real or not? No, just watch and enjoy. I love it when a woman actually orgasms, but I am not going to waste my time trying to determine if she is faking or not in a video. I have an orgasm fetish, not an acting fetish. Yet, I don't spend time trying to figure out if it is fake or not. Come on folks....Just enjoy the video. If you don't like it, great. But this "I know she is faking even though I have never met the woman, touched her, talked to her and never ever heard her tell anyone she is faking, I just know!" is kind of silly.
I think this comes down to a matter of perspectives; some people base their entire viewpoint on their experiences with videos and paid 'lees. As you've said, in the real world, people react differently to stimuli; I've known more than a few women who were ticklish, and loved the sensations, but "played up" their reactions because they wanted the tickling to continue. Were they "faking", if they were genuinely sensitive to it, and enjoyed it, but didn't react the same way as a model in a video? Of course not. I've also tickled women who were genuinely ticklish, and who hated it. They didn't laugh. They didn't like it. It just doesn't work like that. A steady diet of videos seems to have created unrealistic expectations.
It's pointless arguing with some of these people. Especially that one guy who clearly said that people can basically now "identify" as being ticklish, I guess.
So if someone's staring at the wall completely still and reaction-less while being tickled, if they're passing gas or reciting La Marseillaise, all that means they're ticklish IF they say so.
You just have to listen what the people are saying, man. Learn to listen.
Or, it could just mean they don't like you, or don't feel comfortable with you. People respond differently to stimuli, depending on the circumstances.
Or, it could just mean they don't like you, or don't feel comfortable with you. People respond differently to stimuli, depending on the circumstances.
Nope, that's a dumb take at best and you clearly don't know what you're talking about, but you think you're right for some reason which makes arguing futile at best.
It doesn't matter if someone likes you or not, except maybe for some EXTREMELY light tickling. If a person is ticklish, they'll react to tickling when you press on. Period.
They'll hate it more if they don't like you or hey'll react differently, but they'll REACT nonetheless. If a person doesn't react to tickling, especially hard tickling - they're NOT ticklish.
You can't identify as being ticklish. I don't know why's that so hard to fathom.
Nope, that's a dumb take at best and you clearly don't know what you're talking about, but you think you're right for some reason which makes arguing futile at best. It doesn't matter if someone likes you or not, except maybe for some EXTREMELY light tickling. If a person is ticklish, they'll react to tickling when you press on. Period. They'll hate it more if they don't like you or they'll react differently, but they'll REACT nonetheless. If a person doesn't react to tickling, especially hard tickling - they're NOT ticklish. You can't identify as being ticklish. I don't know why's that so hard to fathom.
Very subjective at best. There was a classic fetish model named Ashley Renee who was routinely called the worst faker and as ticklish as a brick; knew a guy who actually tickled her many times, no reason to lie, and he said she was very ticklish. Would trust that opinion but goes to show how perceptions can vary and even a majority does not mean it is accurate.
Look, guys, first of all, being an authority on stepping out of the introvert comfort zone and talking*to people does not make you an authority of tickling in general or give you the right to belittle or project accusations of inexperience*OR arrogance onto people.* I'm looking at you, Wolf and primetime.* You might be able to tell a couple of people here how to meet people, and*the fact that you have the*ability to talk to people comfortably in a fetish environment is nice*(In my opinion, due to a lack of need for social skills to break the ice and accessibility, taking trips to fetish meetups aren't the greatest sign of social grace).* However, whatever experience(s) came of your social meeting(s) do(es) NOT alone make you such an authority on the matter that you can belittle other people's perceptions on the matter.* Once again, Wolf and primetime are doing that alot.* There are those of us who may have not as many experiences tickling in our personal/adult lives as you.* That does not mean that we don't have ANY experience, OR a concept of how people's attitudes affect their interactions with others.
While we don't talk about it here because it's against the rules, for good reason, MUCH of the reason that we identify with each other is that most of us experienced and gave tickling quite often while growing up and recognized the effect it had on us.* We have also tickled or been tickled randomly, if only playfully, many times in adulthood as well.* Most people here KNOW that it is a feeling that can be fought off sometimes if someone really don't like the person or being tickled.* That doesn't mean that the only reason we have experienced non-ticklish reactions is because we're a bunch of deviants touching people against their will.* The fact that you have to go THAT FAR in accusations to discredit people that you'd suggest that the people we were with or tickled never even liked us and we were somehow too stupid to realize it, spreading such a toxic concept really suggests that you don't have any confidence about what you're saying.* I'll say it again, it's just plain abusive.
I'm somewhat happy that a thread on this site has turned into a point for people to question how they perceive their sexuality and reality if they never did before, and I appreciate the agnostic subtext in this discussion.* But if experience doing things, NOT NECESSARILY understanding them, just doing them more often than others, alone gives a person the right to belittle other people's views, not logic and argument, then I suppose that all of the years so many people have spent studying science, philosophy, religion* and the human experience and reflecting on their own lives and other people's was a waste of time.
In reality, a person who studies one lesson over an over*could be an authority on the matter, but they could also just be a terrible student and have never learned anymore than the person who studied the same lesson only once.* The fact that these threads tend to turn into flat out flame wars make me think that very few people are even secure about their conclusions at all, if not also certain.
I've been aware of the diversity of how certain experiences are perceived*as sexualities since I realized tickling affected me sexually. I've been curious about sexuality since somebody I was close to came out to me as gay when I was young. Not making a connection with that necessarily, but I've also learned how not only physiological differences, but also certain life experiences have formed people's reactions to certain situations that may also affect their sexuality.* It's a topic I'm open minded*about.
primetime, I'm aware that people like the man on the hooks you met at that Fetish convention enjoy themself as they experience pain.* I think that is another rare and interesting experience to stimuli, but that isn't exactly the question here.* The question relating to your experience and this thread I would ask wouldn't be "Did HE say that it hurt him?", the question I would ask would be "Could YOU SEE that it hurt him, or that it was a part of his experience, in addition to enjoyment?".* I imagine that you must have come to some conclusion and asked yourself these questions before you asked him.
Personally, I'm not saying that a person can't react differently, like I said before about the woman you mentioned who*is extremely ticklish but doesn't laugh or move, that's possible and that's fine.* But that's not the point here.* The question is, when you were with her, could you SENSE, SEE or otherwise FEEL anything when you tickled her?* From a sudden emotional irregularity between you two to even a muscle twitch?* Some people can't*feel the electricity between themself and others, but if you acknowledge that you could see, feel or sense SOMETHING with her, THAT'S the point about being able to see authenticity.* For reasons related to sense, you must have come to SOME conclusion,*unless she naturally creates an emotional*blank with people when tickled as a defense tactic or something.
And honestly, if you're with someone, you abandon the idea of having any amount of intuition about your partner's feelings,*simply to enjoy yourself, or if your*intuition was untrained and WRONG, I don't know if that could be possible for you primetime.* You talk about being with several women.* But not having or giving validity to the idea of being conscious of their feelings could very well make*you a much less effective partner, unless they're okay with giving YOU all the directions.* If you're doing as well as you are, whether giving orgasms or tickling, you MUST*be sensing something when you're with them.* After all, if MOST people can't tickle themselves, it would never work if they had to give a tickler all the directions and control their*hands.* You'd have to figure out what tickles them and what doesn't, or they wouldn't enjoy it.
Either way, videos that offer little to no signs of a genuine ticklish feeling are pretty boring for the reason of immediate reward from a reaction.* Shoot, I might like to see reactions like the woman you're talking about primetime, see what it looks like and if it really is so hard to read.* Whatever feedback given, even spoken, about how torturous it is, might offer a unique form of enjoyment.* I'm guessing that it would have to give them SOME kind of reaction, even an increased heartbeat, body temperature, headache, or something if it really is torture for them.* Otherwise, it almost sounds like they go into a very short period comatose state, which would be one of the ONLY situations where you might not be able to sense the effect you're having on someone, in which case unless you just like touching them, I just don't see the appeal in tickling them.
(Quite a lot of words)