Usually, tickling websites contain a waring, that you are going to view "adult", or "sexually explicit" content. What do you think, are tickling sites the same as the ordinary porn stuff? If not, where do you think is the difference? If yes, then why? Can tickling stuff influence the mental growing-up of non-adults? In which way?
-
If you would like to get your account Verified, read this thread -
The TMF is sponsored by Clips4sale - By supporting them, you're supporting us. -
>>> If you cannot get into your account email me at [email protected] <<<
Don't forget to include your username
The TMF is sponsored by:
Is tickling pornography?
- Thread starter Nighttime
- Start date
Depends on what's inside ...
Well, there are a lot of kinds of TK sites. For me, lets say, Toyou site is not pornography - people are fully clothed, pics are candid and non - sexual. They are erotic for some kind of people (I mean us, ticklephiles) but for majority of people they are only funny pics. Now lets take Boundfeet.com pictures ... Naked, bound women with spread legs, pubic hair and vaginas in plain sight. In addition they are tickled, but it adds an extra kink, but the pictures are sexually arousing for every heterosexual male ... For me that IS the pornography ...
The second thing of course is definition of pornography. In my country it's very troublesome, because there isn't any legal one. But a picture of naked woman in the midst of a sexual activity for me ceinterly qualifies ... But I am an adult and I am not ashamed of watching this, and yes, I feel "better" then people watching "normal" porn sites, although technically I shouldn't.
Well, there are a lot of kinds of TK sites. For me, lets say, Toyou site is not pornography - people are fully clothed, pics are candid and non - sexual. They are erotic for some kind of people (I mean us, ticklephiles) but for majority of people they are only funny pics. Now lets take Boundfeet.com pictures ... Naked, bound women with spread legs, pubic hair and vaginas in plain sight. In addition they are tickled, but it adds an extra kink, but the pictures are sexually arousing for every heterosexual male ... For me that IS the pornography ...
The second thing of course is definition of pornography. In my country it's very troublesome, because there isn't any legal one. But a picture of naked woman in the midst of a sexual activity for me ceinterly qualifies ... But I am an adult and I am not ashamed of watching this, and yes, I feel "better" then people watching "normal" porn sites, although technically I shouldn't.
That's a lot of questions, nighttime. 
The answers lie in the differences ansuz points out between what's erotic for you and what's pornographic to everyone else. For most ticklephiles, tickling is erotic. A girl laughing while a guy tickles her waist is an erotic image for ticklephiles but few others. Add nudity or sexual activity and everyone sees it as a pornographic image.
Because I find tickling erotic, tickling sites have erotic content for me whether they're pornographic or not. So I do regard them as the same as other sites I find erotic (bdsm, powerplay, etc.).
As for tickling images influencing growing children: if this is your kink, it's going to influence you from the start of your sexual awareness. No efforts to keep tickling stuff out of your hands is going to change that. If it's not your kink, such things are going to bounce off you. I don't think my classmates were as fascinated as I by the illustration in our early American history book of punishment in the stocks. (Or maybe they were.) Whether or not young ticklephiles have access to erotic material, I doubt it changes the weirdness and guilt they feel about it. But sites like this that offer community and understanding would have been a big help to me when I was younger.
The answers lie in the differences ansuz points out between what's erotic for you and what's pornographic to everyone else. For most ticklephiles, tickling is erotic. A girl laughing while a guy tickles her waist is an erotic image for ticklephiles but few others. Add nudity or sexual activity and everyone sees it as a pornographic image.
Because I find tickling erotic, tickling sites have erotic content for me whether they're pornographic or not. So I do regard them as the same as other sites I find erotic (bdsm, powerplay, etc.).
As for tickling images influencing growing children: if this is your kink, it's going to influence you from the start of your sexual awareness. No efforts to keep tickling stuff out of your hands is going to change that. If it's not your kink, such things are going to bounce off you. I don't think my classmates were as fascinated as I by the illustration in our early American history book of punishment in the stocks. (Or maybe they were.
) Whether or not young ticklephiles have access to erotic material, I doubt it changes the weirdness and guilt they feel about it. But sites like this that offer community and understanding would have been a big help to me when I was younger.
SmileyTkls
2nd Level Orange Feather
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2001
- Messages
- 2,369
- Points
- 0
As for my take on it, I'd have to agree with some of the others and say that it depends on the content of the pics or multimedia, as well as the mindset of the viewer. The human mind has the wonderful, or for some terrible, ability to turn almost anything into a sexually charged symbol/activator for sensuality. So, taking that into mind, while a pic may be harmless to most, to some it will be sexual or pornographic, and we should be aware and post those signs, even if only for ourselves. Having said that, where are the pics?!? LOL.
Smiley
Smiley
Tickling can be VERY erotic for me as well but it depends on the site and the situation.
At our gatherings out here, although it's exciting sexually, I don't usually get as "excited" during a group scene. However, the one on one situation can be VERY different. It still depends on the scene and who's involved and what we've agreed to in advance.
I actually find the stories more exciting than pics. I don't know if that's a woman thing but it is definitely that way for this gal.
At our gatherings out here, although it's exciting sexually, I don't usually get as "excited" during a group scene. However, the one on one situation can be VERY different. It still depends on the scene and who's involved and what we've agreed to in advance.
I actually find the stories more exciting than pics. I don't know if that's a woman thing but it is definitely that way for this gal.
TicklingDuo
3rd Level Yellow Feather
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2001
- Messages
- 3,734
- Points
- 0
can be but doesn't have to be
I think it's all in how it's presented. In putting together the links page for my own site, I've come across sites that are more porn than tickling, sites that are very innocent tickling fun, and everything in between.
I think it's only responsible for those including any form of sexul content to note that minors should not view it.
Ann
I think it's all in how it's presented. In putting together the links page for my own site, I've come across sites that are more porn than tickling, sites that are very innocent tickling fun, and everything in between.
I think it's only responsible for those including any form of sexul content to note that minors should not view it.
Ann
TicklingIsLife
3rd Level Orange Feather
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2001
- Messages
- 2,731
- Points
- 0
For me, when nudity is involved, its pornography.
But thats just me
But thats just me
"are tickling sites the same as the ordinary porn stuff?"
I don't believe most of them are. The line is blurred for some.
"If not, where do you think is the difference?"
Many don't contain nudity or obvious sexual overtones. I don't think that adult content or erotica constitutes porn.
Can tickling stuff influence the mental growing-up of non-adults? In which way?
I think most things can influence children. However, kids with no understanding of Bondage play come up with restraint and/or tickling games all on their own. Whether by pinning someone or playing captured spy or cowboy, etc. So unless a little boy or girl already has an interest for bondage and/or tickling in them, they probably aren't likely to be affected at all, (and almost certainly not adversely), by looking at a picture of someone tied and being tickled. Unless there is nudity or provocative clothing, but then I see that the same as the mainstream movies in theatres.
I don't believe most of them are. The line is blurred for some.
"If not, where do you think is the difference?"
Many don't contain nudity or obvious sexual overtones. I don't think that adult content or erotica constitutes porn.
Can tickling stuff influence the mental growing-up of non-adults? In which way?
I think most things can influence children. However, kids with no understanding of Bondage play come up with restraint and/or tickling games all on their own. Whether by pinning someone or playing captured spy or cowboy, etc. So unless a little boy or girl already has an interest for bondage and/or tickling in them, they probably aren't likely to be affected at all, (and almost certainly not adversely), by looking at a picture of someone tied and being tickled. Unless there is nudity or provocative clothing, but then I see that the same as the mainstream movies in theatres.
H
harvey
Guest
Is tickling pornographic?
Tickling in itself is not pornographic, however a great many references to tickling can be found in the printed porn of the past 35 years. In many cases these references were in the sex-related context, often in situations where a “victim” (frequently a woman) was being subjugated for whatever reason, and tickling was one of several methods employed to punish, humiliate, persuade, or break the will of the victim.
Many of us have read such accounts in the ‘pornographic novels’ of the late 1960’s and more recently. For those who have not, one such classic is Peter Jensen’s tale of ‘The Blackmailed Bride’. In this particular story, the main female character has been secretly photographed in a series of ‘compromising’ sexual positions. A wealthy Mexican man gains possession of these pictures and threatens to show them to the woman’s husband, unless she ‘cooperates’ with him. He takes her into his little ‘playroom’ where he humiliates her by having her undress in front of him.
In the room is a timer with a string attached. He attaches the photos to the string up near the ceiling and tells her that she can have them when she can reach them. He then sets the timer on slow and proceeds to ‘torment’ her as the photos descend at crawl speed. One of her initial torments begins when the Mexican ties her spreadeagled to the bed. He then tickles her all over with a feather attached to a long pole. At first she struggles and screams. Then, in the predictable fashion so common in all porno novels, she loses her self-control and begins to be aroused by the feather’s caresses. He continues to tickle her until she is unable to resist and agrees to have sex with him. Then he stops and changes her position so he can violate’ her with a mechanized vibrating dildo. (I’m not making this up, really.)
This is but one example of what many of us older ticklers ‘cut our teeth on' as we were growing up. Since almost every tickle-related reference we saw was in the pornographic context, it’s no wonder many of us still have difficulty distinguishing tickling from actual porn, especially if the victim is partially or fully exposed. I believe the ‘subjugative’ nature of most of these plots also helped make us feel that we were somehow perverted. In these early times, it never dawned on some of us that there were women out there who could enjoy being ticklees just as much as we enjoyed being the ticklers.
Tickling in itself is not pornographic, however a great many references to tickling can be found in the printed porn of the past 35 years. In many cases these references were in the sex-related context, often in situations where a “victim” (frequently a woman) was being subjugated for whatever reason, and tickling was one of several methods employed to punish, humiliate, persuade, or break the will of the victim.
Many of us have read such accounts in the ‘pornographic novels’ of the late 1960’s and more recently. For those who have not, one such classic is Peter Jensen’s tale of ‘The Blackmailed Bride’. In this particular story, the main female character has been secretly photographed in a series of ‘compromising’ sexual positions. A wealthy Mexican man gains possession of these pictures and threatens to show them to the woman’s husband, unless she ‘cooperates’ with him. He takes her into his little ‘playroom’ where he humiliates her by having her undress in front of him.
In the room is a timer with a string attached. He attaches the photos to the string up near the ceiling and tells her that she can have them when she can reach them. He then sets the timer on slow and proceeds to ‘torment’ her as the photos descend at crawl speed. One of her initial torments begins when the Mexican ties her spreadeagled to the bed. He then tickles her all over with a feather attached to a long pole. At first she struggles and screams. Then, in the predictable fashion so common in all porno novels, she loses her self-control and begins to be aroused by the feather’s caresses. He continues to tickle her until she is unable to resist and agrees to have sex with him. Then he stops and changes her position so he can violate’ her with a mechanized vibrating dildo. (I’m not making this up, really.)
This is but one example of what many of us older ticklers ‘cut our teeth on' as we were growing up. Since almost every tickle-related reference we saw was in the pornographic context, it’s no wonder many of us still have difficulty distinguishing tickling from actual porn, especially if the victim is partially or fully exposed. I believe the ‘subjugative’ nature of most of these plots also helped make us feel that we were somehow perverted. In these early times, it never dawned on some of us that there were women out there who could enjoy being ticklees just as much as we enjoyed being the ticklers.
Great comments. I'm gonna try a different response.
Not unless the site in question contains pornographic content. The Gatherings site is a "tickling" site, and it's not pornographic. Not all are, but I suspect that there are sites dealing with tickling that have nudity and bondage in the pictorial content.
Don't know Anything *can* affect a young mind, in a variety of ways. How do you mean? Casually? Tickling videos? The context affects the answer, here. If you tickle your kid, no, that ain't guaranteed to affect the kid. If you have content around (magazines, video, digital files) with nudity and tickling, that's likely to create an association for the child. Same's true for tickling and bondage content.
What then?
Well, that's a tough one. How do you present the rest of the sexual content of the world to said child? Relate it as such, and inform appropriately.
I was told, for instance, about bondage at a young age, 'cause of some goofyness with the kids in my 'hood, where we were tyin' this kid to a tree, for silly cowboys and indians stuff. One woman freaked, and ma mentioned to me that some folks have issues with bondage, and that we shouldn't really TIE the kid, unless we wanted to hear that lady yell a lot. Not wantin' t'hear such, no one ever SAW us tie anyone to anything again...
I'm of the perspective that some of us have this hard-wired in our heads, and others learn such from those of us that are hard-wired. I could be wrong, though. No one'll pay me for the study...
dvnc
Nighttime said:
Not unless the site in question contains pornographic content. The Gatherings site is a "tickling" site, and it's not pornographic. Not all are, but I suspect that there are sites dealing with tickling that have nudity and bondage in the pictorial content.
Nighttime said:
Don't know Anything *can* affect a young mind, in a variety of ways. How do you mean? Casually? Tickling videos? The context affects the answer, here. If you tickle your kid, no, that ain't guaranteed to affect the kid. If you have content around (magazines, video, digital files) with nudity and tickling, that's likely to create an association for the child. Same's true for tickling and bondage content.
What then?
Well, that's a tough one. How do you present the rest of the sexual content of the world to said child? Relate it as such, and inform appropriately.
I was told, for instance, about bondage at a young age, 'cause of some goofyness with the kids in my 'hood, where we were tyin' this kid to a tree, for silly cowboys and indians stuff. One woman freaked, and ma mentioned to me that some folks have issues with bondage, and that we shouldn't really TIE the kid, unless we wanted to hear that lady yell a lot. Not wantin' t'hear such, no one ever SAW us tie anyone to anything again...
I'm of the perspective that some of us have this hard-wired in our heads, and others learn such from those of us that are hard-wired. I could be wrong, though. No one'll pay me for the study...
dvnc
Than kyou
Thanks to everybody who sent comments to my thread. I´d like you to know, that I agree with the most of you and I don´t think that tickling=porn. I´m a ticklephile, just like all of us here. I just wanted to start an interresting discussion based on what I´ve seen (all those warnings and stuff). My opinion is - tickling itself is NOT pornographic. (for me it´s erotic, but that´s something different) Nudity can be pornographic, bondage as well. If some of such elements are involved, the content may be called "pornographic" independetly on the presence of tickling.
Now let´s start something a bit different (not O.T.). What do you think about the tickling videos actresses. They are often tied up and exposed. Are they something like porn-stars? What is your opinion?
Thanks to everybody who sent comments to my thread. I´d like you to know, that I agree with the most of you and I don´t think that tickling=porn. I´m a ticklephile, just like all of us here. I just wanted to start an interresting discussion based on what I´ve seen (all those warnings and stuff). My opinion is - tickling itself is NOT pornographic. (for me it´s erotic, but that´s something different) Nudity can be pornographic, bondage as well. If some of such elements are involved, the content may be called "pornographic" independetly on the presence of tickling.
Now let´s start something a bit different (not O.T.). What do you think about the tickling videos actresses. They are often tied up and exposed. Are they something like porn-stars? What is your opinion?
TicklingDuo
3rd Level Yellow Feather
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2001
- Messages
- 3,734
- Points
- 0
Re: Than kyou
I've seen a number of tickling videos and video clips over the years. Many have had nudity in them. Some, I would consider to be porn and others not. The difference?...the attitude of those in the film. If an actress simply happens to be nude and/or bound while being tickled, I wouldn't necessarily consider it porn...or them a porn star. However, in films where the model is moaning and gyrating (and even msturbating) and presenting the experience in an overtly sexual way, I would consider it to be porn...and them a porn star.
Just my two cents.
Ann
Nighttime said:
I've seen a number of tickling videos and video clips over the years. Many have had nudity in them. Some, I would consider to be porn and others not. The difference?...the attitude of those in the film. If an actress simply happens to be nude and/or bound while being tickled, I wouldn't necessarily consider it porn...or them a porn star. However, in films where the model is moaning and gyrating (and even msturbating) and presenting the experience in an overtly sexual way, I would consider it to be porn...and them a porn star.
Just my two cents.
Ann
Re: Than kyou
No. They're something like fetish video stars. They don't need to involve in bodily fluids, or sexually intimate contact. If they did, then that'd be the line crossed. Some can argue that the nudity and verbage crosses over, and perhaps it does, but I've been fortunate enough to see no evidence to such. Hope I never do, either. For companies represented here, there's no comparison to porn, IMHO.
my $0.02,
dvnc
Nighttime said:
No. They're something like fetish video stars. They don't need to involve in bodily fluids, or sexually intimate contact. If they did, then that'd be the line crossed. Some can argue that the nudity and verbage crosses over, and perhaps it does, but I've been fortunate enough to see no evidence to such. Hope I never do, either. For companies represented here, there's no comparison to porn, IMHO.
my $0.02,
dvnc
H
harvey
Guest
Re: Than kyou
Yes, I would say they are something like porn-stars. Some of them - Ashley Rene, Greta Karlsen (aka Barbie Lyons in some Calstar videos) and others were porn stars before they ever made a tickling video. Many of them also make bondage vids without tickling.
Does this somehow make them worse than other tickle-vid actresses? Not in my mind. Porno, like beauty, seems to be in the eye of the beholder, just as it always was in the porno literature wherein tickling was occasionally mentioned.
Nighttime said:
Yes, I would say they are something like porn-stars. Some of them - Ashley Rene, Greta Karlsen (aka Barbie Lyons in some Calstar videos) and others were porn stars before they ever made a tickling video. Many of them also make bondage vids without tickling.
Does this somehow make them worse than other tickle-vid actresses? Not in my mind. Porno, like beauty, seems to be in the eye of the beholder, just as it always was in the porno literature wherein tickling was occasionally mentioned.
WOOHOO!! I just figured out how to "quote!" LOL
....NO comments from YOU DVNC!!!
My take on it is that they aren't. I just had a funny thought as to why.... it involves being the best man, being responsible for the bachelor party...and popping in a TK vid at "the" moment! ROTFL
Other than that, I look to Hollywood, in that many a "legitimate" actor has appeared nude, and even in bondage in films that aren't considered porn. Artistic expression/merit or not, you put a nekkid Halle Berry or Gwyneth Paltrow scene in a commercial film, I do believe the intent is to at least partially titillate.
Nighttime said:
....NO comments from YOU DVNC!!!
My take on it is that they aren't. I just had a funny thought as to why.... it involves being the best man, being responsible for the bachelor party...and popping in a TK vid at "the" moment! ROTFL
Other than that, I look to Hollywood, in that many a "legitimate" actor has appeared nude, and even in bondage in films that aren't considered porn. Artistic expression/merit or not, you put a nekkid Halle Berry or Gwyneth Paltrow scene in a commercial film, I do believe the intent is to at least partially titillate.
TicklesXXX
TMF Master
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2012
- Messages
- 979
- Points
- 0
It is if they are naked, or getting sexual stimulation. It is not, is they are not naked.
Yay, thread necromantics again!
I would say it depends on the intent with which the material was filmed; if it was filmed with the intent to be sold on clips4sale as jack-off material, then it is pornography, if it was people fooling around putting it up on youtube, then no.
I would say it depends on the intent with which the material was filmed; if it was filmed with the intent to be sold on clips4sale as jack-off material, then it is pornography, if it was people fooling around putting it up on youtube, then no.
helplessandhappy
TMF Expert
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2004
- Messages
- 393
- Points
- 0
I absolutely believe that any form of produced tickling videos are pornography, whether clothed or not, and whether anything sexual happens or not. Any videos designed for the purpose of sexual gratification are pornography. I've yet to see a tickling video that wasn't made for this purpose.
helplessandhappy
TMF Expert
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2004
- Messages
- 393
- Points
- 0
THANK YOU! Exactly! I saw some videos a while ago that featured young beautiful women getting tickled. Usually, they weren't tied, and they were always clothed. It was very clear that these videos, which focused on young, virginal-looking girls being tickled half to death, were for the purposes of masturbation. If these girls convinced themselves of anything otherwise, I feel sorry for them. It's porn. Period.
Is it a form of porn that would likely be less frowned upon by many people? Sure. But it's still porn. A video of some nice hard-yet-traditional missionary style sex is porn too, but it would seem tame compared to the video of the girl getting banged by 70 different guys in every single orifice she has. It doesn't matter. It's all porn.
If you're masturbating to it and the person who produced the video knew you would masturbate to it, it's porn.
luvgirlsfeet
Verified
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2004
- Messages
- 40,168
- Points
- 63
in my opinion I don't think it is
