My first date strategy for tonight

AlBundyIsMyHero · May 29, 2022

TheMasterTouch said:
I have a daughter, so of course I worry about her safety. I worry about things that could happen to her when she starts dating. I hope she never gets into an abusive relationship, never experiences a sexual assault, and so on.

At the same time, I also worry about what's happening to our young men. When things have progressed (regressed, in my view) to the point where a man feels guilty about getting on an elevator or a subway car alone with a woman, that's bad! Equally bad is when a man fears getting on that elevator or subway car because he realizes she can accuse him of doing something even if nothing happens. Even if he can prove nothing happened, he can still be ostracized and shamed to the point of losing his job, being kicked out of college, or worse. "Guilty even if proven innocent" is often the standard in the Court of Popular Opinion.

The process of socialization used to allow some leeway for people to have some awkward interactions without completely destroying the offending person's life. Now, we try to create "rules" for almost every human interaction. These "rules" are often created by the most hypersensitive people or people who have been through an unhealed psychological trauma. This leads to "rules" that are rather inflexible and have severe consequences for each violation.

My primary issues with these "rules" is that people aren't learning how to navigate awkward and uncomfortable situations. Learning how to read and interpret another person's body language and nonverbal communication is an important skill to have. Many of the "rules" we have now are preventing people from acquiring that knowledge. I remember how socially awkward I was in my 20s, and I wonder how I'd fare if I were coming of age in these times.

I'm not sure if your daughter does any sports or anything but if you are worried about her safety, have her take Krav Maga and you won't have to worry about her not being able to handle herself.

primetime · May 29, 2022

rally said:
These are fair points, but my issue is with the intent of his post.

I will conditionally agree that light/playful tickling on a first date isn't necessarily inappropriate or weird. If we stick with the context though, as you've said, we need to pull the focus all the way back. On most first dates, something like this wouldn't necessarily be a red flag. For the context of someone who has a tickle fetish though, tickling is something that is (often) associated with sexual pleasure. The way that he came up with this elaborate road map on how to respond depending on HER response is where I had the first issue. It is a silent acknowledgement that this type of contact COULD be considered, by her, to be unwanted/inappropriate, and he was going into this with a set of eject buttons to deescalate if she had a negative response. Again, I'll agree that playfully poking your date on the side on a first date, CAN be considered acceptable depending on the tone/rapport/etc of the date. What makes me have a problem is his mindset in doing so. Whether or not MOST PEOPLE sneaking a quick tickle to someone who is not intimately familiar/comfortable around them could be considered inappropriate is debatable, but within the context of a tickle fetishist, it becomes something else.

My other issue is with the perceived intent of him posting about this at all. By his own admission, he made this post with the expectation that he was going to receive a largely negative response. His apparent need to make his "anti-woke" rant in his latest response only strengthens that perception. So I ask, what was the point? Just to get a rise out of everyone? To start an argument so that he could bust out his argument about allegations taken too far? It just strikes me as him trying to start some shit.

I understand your point and I see why people may have a problem with his "intent". But, let's think about it for a moment. Let's say instead of tickling her, he put a post about how he wants to kiss her on the first date. He says everything is going great and they have good chemistry. He wants to kiss her, but not sure which method. Should he go for the full on lip on lip, tongue french kiss, or just a peck on the lips, or on the cheek. Most of us would not even care and will probably even tell him to go with what feels natural. A kiss on the first date is not earth shattering, right? Kissing though can cause sexual arousal. It can lead to actual sex on the first date. So why is that "pre-planning" to kiss on a first date ok, but not a quick, one second poke to tickle the date?

We have a tickle fetish. But we shouldn't look at it like it is something so special that it is a once in a lifetime opportunity. Like another poster said, tickling is done with non-fetishists. People know what it is. Some people like it, some don't. It can be playful, or someone could loathe it. Just because it can sexually arouse us, does not mean we have to go full confessional to the partner. Tickling can be fun as well. I have introduced tickling to romantic partners and didn't tell them about the fetish. Hell, even when we start to get intimate and I tickle them erotically, they wonder why am I tickling them, and I tell them watching them laugh and squirm turns me on. I show them the physical manifestation of that and they get it. I don't tell them the "fetish" word. I just tell them it excites me and then we proceed. Did I tell them I have a fetish technically? No, but they kind of understand the sexual aspect of it and they go with it. They saw how turned on I get and they are good to go. People participate in their fetish in different ways. Just because the OP wants to do a quick poke on a first date with a woman he is establishing a good rapport and you (and others) may not approve, does not necessarily make it wrong. Just like if he pre-planned kissing this woman after the date, then what is the difference really?

I have actually thought about it time to time where I would make a thread similar to this, just as an experiment. Just to see if all the "moral warriors" will come out and berate me. It does need to be pointed out sometimes because some folks genuinely want to share things, but afraid to because of the "moral police". Obviously, I can't do that now, but think about it. People tend to go a bit overboard in their reactions to these kind of threads. They see anything that is not a full confessional to the partner before any tickling that takes place as something bad. There are situations where it IS bad (tickling random strangers where you have zero interaction with them is a prime example), but in this case, it really isn't "bad". He wants to tickle a date he established a fun rapport with. It didn't come across as he was going to tickle no matter what the situation was.

rally · May 30, 2022

primetime said:
I understand your point and I see why people may have a problem with his "intent". But, let's think about it for a moment. Let's say instead of tickling her, he put a post about how he wants to kiss her on the first date. He says everything is going great and they have good chemistry. He wants to kiss her, but not sure which method. Should he go for the full on lip on lip, tongue french kiss, or just a peck on the lips, or on the cheek. Most of us would not even care and will probably even tell him to go with what feels natural. A kiss on the first date is not earth shattering, right? Kissing though can cause sexual arousal. It can lead to actual sex on the first date. So why is that "pre-planning" to kiss on a first date ok, but not a quick, one second poke to tickle the date?

I see what you're saying but you're, IMO, drawing a false equivalence. "Pre-planning" a kiss (and pre-planning what to say depending on response) on a first date is, again IMO, different than what he's describing here because he's attempting to, for the lack of a better term (and only for a lack), "forcefully" introduce his fetish into the relationship. A person's reaction to being kissed may be different than their reaction to being tickled. It may be more positive for one than the other, but both are potentially an unwanted advance. And again, taken in the context of where this is being discussed (a tickle fetish message board), the behavior comes across as crude. MOST people consider pros & cons/potential responses for a kiss on a first date, but it's typically (typically, again not a one size fits all statement) done in the moment. If you go into every date planning on how to work a kiss in, you can come across as less interested in the date (and by extension, the partner as a person), and more interested in doing your thing with your date as the lab rat.

primetime said:
We have a tickle fetish. But we shouldn't look at it like it is something so special that it is a once in a lifetime opportunity. Like another poster said, tickling is done with non-fetishists. People know what it is. Some people like it, some don't. It can be playful, or someone could loathe it. Just because it can sexually arouse us, does not mean we have to go full confessional to the partner. Tickling can be fun as well. I have introduced tickling to romantic partners and didn't tell them about the fetish. Hell, even when we start to get intimate and I tickle them erotically, they wonder why am I tickling them, and I tell them watching them laugh and squirm turns me on. I show them the physical manifestation of that and they get it. I don't tell them the "fetish" word. I just tell them it excites me and then we proceed. Did I tell them I have a fetish technically? No, but they kind of understand the sexual aspect of it and they go with it. They saw how turned on I get and they are good to go. People participate in their fetish in different ways. Just because the OP wants to do a quick poke on a first date with a woman he is establishing a good rapport and you (and others) may not approve, does not necessarily make it wrong. Just like if he pre-planned kissing this woman after the date, then what is the difference really?

I'm not saying he needs to necessarily confess everything before he attempts to act on his fetish in a relationship. What I was saying is that there's a natural way to do it, such as the experiences you've described, rather than going into the date itself with a plan, which is where I think a lot of the push back is coming from.

primetime said:
I have actually thought about it time to time where I would make a thread similar to this, just as an experiment. Just to see if all the "moral warriors" will come out and berate me. It does need to be pointed out sometimes because some folks genuinely want to share things, but afraid to because of the "moral police". Obviously, I can't do that now, but think about it. People tend to go a bit overboard in their reactions to these kind of threads. They see anything that is not a full confessional to the partner before any tickling that takes place as something bad. There are situations where it IS bad (tickling random strangers where you have zero interaction with them is a prime example), but in this case, it really isn't "bad". He wants to tickle a date he established a fun rapport with. It didn't come across as he was going to tickle no matter what the situation was.

But again, I'm not saying he needs to go full confessional on this. It's not necessarily the act itself that I've had an issue with (as I may not have properly elaborated before), it's the general tone and attitude that he has about it. As far as your social experiment... This, I suppose, would fall into the category of "you do you" (though you haven't actually done it), but again I would ask; what purpose would that serve? I don't see any benefit or value in seeing the "moral police" all show up, but if you were curious then... whatever I guess. This particular post however, particularly after his own responses, has given the impression that he was simply looking for an argument.

Mr. Feet · May 30, 2022

I'm enjoying this thread and all the different perspectives.

I think people have different approaches, and one isn't necessarily the best for everyone. One typical of the male mind: approach everything with a plan. It's not all that nefarious. It's just a way to approach things, including a date.

Some guys went to extremes with seduction planning and behavioral mechanics in the PUA community in the 90s. It was amusing, and mostly harmless. Lately, that community has morphed into "red pill" and "men's rights" and dating has become political, which is silly. We're hardly living in a legal matriarchy with our current Supreme Court.

On the other hand, it's not a woke conspiracy that some people really value consent and talking through things. It's just a different approach.

Beyond differing physical boundaries, some people have trauma and might not want to be touched. Is it worth the risk of triggering someone's trauma? I am definitely more on the cautious/empathic (beta?

) side myself, but I won't say that's the one and only way to live. Just something to consider.

I'm not a planner or a pollster. I just enjoyed the mystery and magic of getting to know someone: the conversation, the subtle energy and subtext between us. I didn't have a checklist of what I wanted from the night; I just wanted to see where it led. I am the Passenger. :lalala:

Ultimately, the people we meet are just humans, not exotic creatures or wild game. I'm not religious but I favor the golden rule. Just treat others how you would like to be treated.

Wesker28 · May 30, 2022

Wow people make things so morally complicated.

Don't plan to tickle the girl, just let it naturally happen.
It doesn't take scientific planning, just show her a good time and if she wants to be touched or flirted with she will let you know.

MrMacphisto · May 30, 2022

Wolf said:
Wow. Okay.
I’m more inclined to take my adult child’s word over something that might “cast doubt” on their “story”, because I trust them (even if they are a woman), and I would take their word over some rando’s. If my child tells me someone hurt them, It would take pretty strong evidence to convince me otherwise. It’s stunning to think that if someone raped your daughter, that they would be lucky to have her father on the jury.

People do tend to overestimate their objectivity, especially when it comes to personal connections being involved. While I respect TMT's attempt to be objective, I'm pretty sure he would be in the same boat as you mentioned if something like this were to happen.

I can't fault someone for attempting to be objective. Also, trust is conditional. If your adult child is known to be truthful, then logically, it would take stronger evidence to doubt them. If your adult child is known to be a liar, well....

Wolf · May 30, 2022

MrMacphisto said:
People do tend to overestimate their objectivity, especially when it comes to personal connections being involved. While I respect TMT's attempt to be objective, I'm pretty sure he would be in the same boat as you mentioned if something like this were to happen.

I can't fault someone for attempting to be objective. Also, trust is conditional. If your adult child is known to be truthful, then logically, it would take stronger evidence to doubt them. If your adult child is known to be a liar, well....

I dunno...

TheMasterTouch said:
My love for my daughter doesn't mean I disregard facts, logic and evidence. If she told me that something happened to her, of course I'm going to support her and believe her. But I'm also going review and listen to facts and evidence. If the facts and evidence tell a different story, or cast doubt on her story, I'm going with the evidence. That's the only way society can function.

Seems he's pretty clear that in the case of any doubt (such as a he said, she said scenario), he's gonna throw her under the bus in the name of his greater obligation to society.

primetime · May 31, 2022

rally said:
I see what you're saying but you're, IMO, drawing a false equivalence. "Pre-planning" a kiss (and pre-planning what to say depending on response) on a first date is, again IMO, different than what he's describing here because he's attempting to, for the lack of a better term (and only for a lack), "forcefully" introduce his fetish into the relationship. A person's reaction to being kissed may be different than their reaction to being tickled. It may be more positive for one than the other, but both are potentially an unwanted advance. And again, taken in the context of where this is being discussed (a tickle fetish message board), the behavior comes across as crude. MOST people consider pros & cons/potential responses for a kiss on a first date, but it's typically (typically, again not a one size fits all statement) done in the moment. If you go into every date planning on how to work a kiss in, you can come across as less interested in the date (and by extension, the partner as a person), and more interested in doing your thing with your date as the lab rat.

I'm not saying he needs to necessarily confess everything before he attempts to act on his fetish in a relationship. What I was saying is that there's a natural way to do it, such as the experiences you've described, rather than going into the date itself with a plan, which is where I think a lot of the push back is coming from.

But again, I'm not saying he needs to go full confessional on this. It's not necessarily the act itself that I've had an issue with (as I may not have properly elaborated before), it's the general tone and attitude that he has about it. As far as your social experiment... This, I suppose, would fall into the category of "you do you" (though you haven't actually done it), but again I would ask; what purpose would that serve? I don't see any benefit or value in seeing the "moral police" all show up, but if you were curious then... whatever I guess. This particular post however, particularly after his own responses, has given the impression that he was simply looking for an argument.

Rally, I disagree with you in terms of this being a false equivalence. It is not. What truly is the difference between planning a kiss or maybe even getting laid and a quick one second poke to tickle? Really think about it. That is not "forcing your fetish" on someone. First, not all tickling is sexual. Let's get that out of the way. Tickling CAN be sexual, but it also CAN NOT be sexual. There are plenty of members on this forum who see tickling as a playing mechanism, or just for fun. Not sexual. Let's say that is what the OP is trying to do. Just be playful. Is that forcing a fetish? I never understood why people think others are "forcing" their fetish on someone else if it is a quick tickle.

There is a potential consequence for kissing on the first date, or trying to get into the other person's pants. The other person may not want to do that on a first date. It may be too early for example. So why is kissing/attempting to have sex not as bad as a quick poke?

I agree with Mr. Feet. People have different approaches and what works for one, may not work for others. That is what I am trying to get across. Just because YOU think he is forcing his fetish and this is a bad idea, others are sitting here wondering why are people so up in arms for this guy planning on tickling his date. If it is a date, there had to be some kind of interaction between the two parties in order to even have a first date. It usually means there is an interest in one another romantically. As the OP said, his entire "plan" rests on how the date is going. If it is not a good date, I doubt he tries it. If it is going well, and the interaction goes in a really good direction, he will try it. There is nothing wrong with a plan. Again, this is the same as some guy thinking he might get "lucky", but in this case, it is a one quick poke. There is no real difference.

The way some folks speak on this forum, you DO need to have a full confessional before tickling someone else. You need to discuss the fetish and what it means to you, and to ask for permission before ANY tickling takes place. Seriously, this is the tone of the detractors of these kind of discussions. I have seen it over and over again. You need to gain permission, even for a quick poke. Tie them down and tickle them? I am sure you definitely need permission for that. But the quick, flirty, poke while the conversations is flowing well, that is cause for alarm! I have been seeing this for years. There truly is a bit of overreaction amongst some people here in certain scenarios. Not all, because some "fantasies" do border on assault, but something innocuous like the OP? Overreaction...

It truly does come down to social cues. I have tickled some friends while at work (OMG!!! Prime tickled someone at his job?!! He could have been fired! You do not tickle anyone at work!!! Bad Prime!! bad bad bad Prime!), and all went well. Why? Because me and that person have a certain bond, a certain relationship where they will not freak out. If we are cracking jokes on one another and razzing each other, I do a quick tickle and we both laugh about it. There are others I will not even remotely try doing that to. Why? Because our "relationship" is not at the level where tickling them is a good idea. If I go out on a date, I read the person and if we get to a certain type of interaction, I might try it, I might not. It all really depends.

This is a much needed discussion. It is good to see the different perspectives without cussing each other out. haha

rally · May 31, 2022

primetime said:
Rally, I disagree with you in terms of this being a false equivalence. It is not. What truly is the difference between planning a kiss or maybe even getting laid and a quick one second poke to tickle? Really think about it. That is not "forcing your fetish" on someone. First, not all tickling is sexual. Let's get that out of the way. Tickling CAN be sexual, but it also CAN NOT be sexual. There are plenty of members on this forum who see tickling as a playing mechanism, or just for fun. Not sexual. Let's say that is what the OP is trying to do. Just be playful. Is that forcing a fetish? I never understood why people think others are "forcing" their fetish on someone else if it is a quick tickle.

There is a potential consequence for kissing on the first date, or trying to get into the other person's pants. The other person may not want to do that on a first date. It may be too early for example. So why is kissing/attempting to have sex not as bad as a quick poke?

I agree with Mr. Feet. People have different approaches and what works for one, may not work for others. That is what I am trying to get across. Just because YOU think he is forcing his fetish and this is a bad idea, others are sitting here wondering why are people so up in arms for this guy planning on tickling his date. If it is a date, there had to be some kind of interaction between the two parties in order to even have a first date. It usually means there is an interest in one another romantically. As the OP said, his entire "plan" rests on how the date is going. If it is not a good date, I doubt he tries it. If it is going well, and the interaction goes in a really good direction, he will try it. There is nothing wrong with a plan. Again, this is the same as some guy thinking he might get "lucky", but in this case, it is a one quick poke. There is no real difference.

The way some folks speak on this forum, you DO need to have a full confessional before tickling someone else. You need to discuss the fetish and what it means to you, and to ask for permission before ANY tickling takes place. Seriously, this is the tone of the detractors of these kind of discussions. I have seen it over and over again. You need to gain permission, even for a quick poke. Tie them down and tickle them? I am sure you definitely need permission for that. But the quick, flirty, poke while the conversations is flowing well, that is cause for alarm! I have been seeing this for years. There truly is a bit of overreaction amongst some people here in certain scenarios. Not all, because some "fantasies" do border on assault, but something innocuous like the OP? Overreaction...

It truly does come down to social cues. I have tickled some friends while at work (OMG!!! Prime tickled someone at his job?!! He could have been fired! You do not tickle anyone at work!!! Bad Prime!! bad bad bad Prime!), and all went well. Why? Because me and that person have a certain bond, a certain relationship where they will not freak out. If we are cracking jokes on one another and razzing each other, I do a quick tickle and we both laugh about it. There are others I will not even remotely try doing that to. Why? Because our "relationship" is not at the level where tickling them is a good idea. If I go out on a date, I read the person and if we get to a certain type of interaction, I might try it, I might not. It all really depends.

This is a much needed discussion. It is good to see the different perspectives without cussing each other out. haha

Agreed, the discussion is nice. It's a much better way to go about addressing the issues around consent than the way that some handle it on the forums here as you've mentioned.

At any rate, I'd like to re-clarify/elaborate a few points that I don't think I've done a good job of fully explaining before. In terms of the false equivalence I mentioned, this is something we may just have to agree to disagree on. I read your response last night and wanted to, as you suggested, take some time to think about what you're trying to explain, and I come back to the same conclusion. My wording of "forcing" the fetish on someone wasn't stated as well as it could have been, but I think you might have misunderstood my intent with the statement. I wasn't suggesting that the OP was forcing his fetish on the date, but rather forcing it's inclusion into the experience, which is a distinction I'm drawing. Forcing his fetish on her would be pouncing and tickling her all over and taking things way too far, which (I believe) we can agree is crossing a line. My comment about forcing his fetish into the situation was referring to the way that he went into the date as a whole, and wanting to include it.

Getting back to the false equivalence though, in terms of your comparison to kissing/sex on a first date I still draw a distinction between the two because, again, of the context of where this is being discussed. Kissing/sex on a first date is something that is (generally) an accepted possibility for both parties. Unless the date is just a "hook-up" (in which case, what does/does not constitute general first date "etiquette" or behavior is completely different), the potential for a kiss or sex on a first date, depending on how the date is going is not weird. The reason I'm drawing the line to separate those acts from tickling his date is, again, because of the context. I'm thinking about it like this: If we were on a spanking forum, and someone posted a similar topic, but planned to smack his date on the ass depending on how things were going, I would, similarly, think it's a little weird. There's a film called Crash (Not the 2006 racism drama) wherein people are turned on sexually by car accidents. If that were an actual fetish (I'm too scared to bother googling to see if it actually exists), and there was a forum for it, and someone posted "if my date seems into me and things are going well I'm gonna slam on my breaks and veer off the road", I would think that's a little weird as well. Admittedly, that's an absurd example to use, but it's WHY my line of thinking on it is where it is.

Something I might have gotten lost in clarifying at some point is that I am KIND of with you in that I don't think the act itself is "wrong". I think the place where you and I are just missing on this is that we're both, as I suggested earlier, pulling the focus back all the way but focusing on different aspects. You're looking at it from a perspective of "in the grand scheme of first date behavior, OP is not being weird". I'm looking at it from a perspective of "this specific act, as is being discussed on a forum dedicated to this specific fetish, comes across as being a little weird". Not saying one is right over the other, so again, we might just not agree on this and that's fine. As you said, it was nice to have an actual discussion about it.

primetime · Jun 1, 2022

rally said:
Agreed, the discussion is nice. It's a much better way to go about addressing the issues around consent than the way that some handle it on the forums here as you've mentioned.

At any rate, I'd like to re-clarify/elaborate a few points that I don't think I've done a good job of fully explaining before. In terms of the false equivalence I mentioned, this is something we may just have to agree to disagree on. I read your response last night and wanted to, as you suggested, take some time to think about what you're trying to explain, and I come back to the same conclusion. My wording of "forcing" the fetish on someone wasn't stated as well as it could have been, but I think you might have misunderstood my intent with the statement. I wasn't suggesting that the OP was forcing his fetish on the date, but rather forcing it's inclusion into the experience, which is a distinction I'm drawing. Forcing his fetish on her would be pouncing and tickling her all over and taking things way too far, which (I believe) we can agree is crossing a line. My comment about forcing his fetish into the situation was referring to the way that he went into the date as a whole, and wanting to include it.

Getting back to the false equivalence though, in terms of your comparison to kissing/sex on a first date I still draw a distinction between the two because, again, of the context of where this is being discussed. Kissing/sex on a first date is something that is (generally) an accepted possibility for both parties. Unless the date is just a "hook-up" (in which case, what does/does not constitute general first date "etiquette" or behavior is completely different), the potential for a kiss or sex on a first date, depending on how the date is going is not weird. The reason I'm drawing the line to separate those acts from tickling his date is, again, because of the context. I'm thinking about it like this: If we were on a spanking forum, and someone posted a similar topic, but planned to smack his date on the ass depending on how things were going, I would, similarly, think it's a little weird. There's a film called Crash (Not the 2006 racism drama) wherein people are turned on sexually by car accidents. If that were an actual fetish (I'm too scared to bother googling to see if it actually exists), and there was a forum for it, and someone posted "if my date seems into me and things are going well I'm gonna slam on my breaks and veer off the road", I would think that's a little weird as well. Admittedly, that's an absurd example to use, but it's WHY my line of thinking on it is where it is.

Something I might have gotten lost in clarifying at some point is that I am KIND of with you in that I don't think the act itself is "wrong". I think the place where you and I are just missing on this is that we're both, as I suggested earlier, pulling the focus back all the way but focusing on different aspects. You're looking at it from a perspective of "in the grand scheme of first date behavior, OP is not being weird". I'm looking at it from a perspective of "this specific act, as is being discussed on a forum dedicated to this specific fetish, comes across as being a little weird". Not saying one is right over the other, so again, we might just not agree on this and that's fine. As you said, it was nice to have an actual discussion about it.

Here is why I say it is the same thing. The only reason why there is an issue is how you feel about tickling. For some, tickling is more sexual than sex itself. I see folks on this forum that take the tickle fetish to a very high personal level. Any kind of tickling is seen as highly sexual. To them, there is no such thing as "playful, platonic tickling". The thing is, as was mentioned during this thread, even mainstream folks know what tickling is. Some do it for flirtatious behavior. Some do it because it is a little fun. In this particular scenario, the OP mentioned that the date had to go a certain way for him to even entertain the idea. There is nothing wrong with wanting to do a fun poke to get a reaction. Him and the date are "vibing" with one another, so there is a reasonable degree of success. If the date reacts in a highly negative way, then it makes you wonder if they were actually enjoying themselves. This is not a prolonged tickling, this is a very brief poke. Like a one second act.

Spanking is not an equivalent in this case. Because unlike tickling, spanking is generally seen as either "punishment" or something kinky you do in privacy. Tickling is such a common thing, that no one in the "vanilla" world would remotely associate tickling with anything sexual. Just like the foot fetish. Mainstream knows what it is, and they associate it with sex. Tickling? a quick poke for example? Naw, the chances of them thinking "This person is assaulting me" is quite low. We both agree that even a one second poke on a complete stranger is not a good idea because there is "zero" relationship between the two parties. But a date? To go on a date, there was SOME kind of interaction where it was positive enough to actually go on a date. So if you are having a good time and the vibe is there, why not do it? Why not plan on it either? What really is the issue with a quick poke. Holding her down and doing a prolonged tickling would be highly risky. But a poke on a date that is going really well seems to scare people on this forum.

So to the folks who think ANY kind of tickling is a highly sexual act, you have to realize that within the tickling fetish, playful tickling does exist and it does not have to be sexual. It could be just a way to play around. That's where my issue is. The group of people who think what the OP is doing is wrong have to realize there are more nuances to the "fetish". There is no need to rip someone apart because their approach to the fetish doesn't match theirs. The OP is not talking about doing a simple poke to a complete stranger, they are talking about doing it to a date where their chemistry is really good.

rally · Jun 1, 2022

primetime said:
Here is why I say it is the same thing. The only reason why there is an issue is how you feel about tickling. For some, tickling is more sexual than sex itself. I see folks on this forum that take the tickle fetish to a very high personal level. Any kind of tickling is seen as highly sexual. To them, there is no such thing as "playful, platonic tickling". The thing is, as was mentioned during this thread, even mainstream folks know what tickling is. Some do it for flirtatious behavior. Some do it because it is a little fun. In this particular scenario, the OP mentioned that the date had to go a certain way for him to even entertain the idea. There is nothing wrong with wanting to do a fun poke to get a reaction. Him and the date are "vibing" with one another, so there is a reasonable degree of success. If the date reacts in a highly negative way, then it makes you wonder if they were actually enjoying themselves. This is not a prolonged tickling, this is a very brief poke. Like a one second act.

Spanking is not an equivalent in this case. Because unlike tickling, spanking is generally seen as either "punishment" or something kinky you do in privacy. Tickling is such a common thing, that no one in the "vanilla" world would remotely associate tickling with anything sexual. Just like the foot fetish. Mainstream knows what it is, and they associate it with sex. Tickling? a quick poke for example? Naw, the chances of them thinking "This person is assaulting me" is quite low. We both agree that even a one second poke on a complete stranger is not a good idea because there is "zero" relationship between the two parties. But a date? To go on a date, there was SOME kind of interaction where it was positive enough to actually go on a date. So if you are having a good time and the vibe is there, why not do it? Why not plan on it either? What really is the issue with a quick poke. Holding her down and doing a prolonged tickling would be highly risky. But a poke on a date that is going really well seems to scare people on this forum.

So to the folks who think ANY kind of tickling is a highly sexual act, you have to realize that within the tickling fetish, playful tickling does exist and it does not have to be sexual. It could be just a way to play around. That's where my issue is. The group of people who think what the OP is doing is wrong have to realize there are more nuances to the "fetish". There is no need to rip someone apart because their approach to the fetish doesn't match theirs. The OP is not talking about doing a simple poke to a complete stranger, they are talking about doing it to a date where their chemistry is really good.

I will agree that the way I feel about it is part of where I had the issue, but it's a minimal part and I'm either not doing a good job of properly explaining it, or you're missing it.

The way that others see it is also relevant, but I think we're getting to the point where we're having a circular discussion. Yes, playful/platonic tickling exists. Tickling friends/co-workers/others as you've mentioned is also a thing and doesn't have to be sexual. The difference with the examples that you've provided earlier and what the OP was describing is that you're doing it with people that you have a relationship/rapport/trust with. You could argue that that "relationship" exists for two people on a date, but it's not to the degree that you likely have with your co-workers, and that difference is enough to separate the two. I also don't think that the length of the act is really relevant, nor do I think that the existence of people (who may or may not be on this forum) that don't associate tickling with sex makes this any less weird to me. A "kiss" could be a quick peck on the cheek that someone could see as an overstep. Again though, many people go into dates with no "plan" other than hope it goes well, or at least just see what happens. Going into a date and deciding, if it's going well, to give them a kiss/tickle isn't an issue. Spanking (or car crashes) are not necessarily "equivalent", but that isn't why I brought them up. I used them as examples to try and illustrate why the context of WHERE this is being discussed is where I had the major issue.

At the end of the day, none of us actually knows enough information about this situation to really make a call on whether OP was "wrong" or not. We don't know who this person he was going on a date is to him (what, if anything, they were before this), we don't know anything about her personality, and we don't know what it is about tickling that he's into. Yes we're all projecting parts of our own feelings into the situation, but my "issue" isn't with the act itself. For most people, as you're saying, you are correct. There IS no issue with any of it. But for a tickle fetishist to post on a tickling forum his pre-planned scenarios on how to tickle his date comes off, to me, as behavior that I think is a little crude. The same as if someone on a spanking forum posted about planning to smack his date on the ass, or a car crash fetishist having a plan to drive into a ditch. Whether these acts are all equivalent is debatable (except car crashes) but the context, to me, is not.

Now having said all of that, at the end of the day, whatever. I'm not going to berate the OP (or you) for having a different view on this the way that some forum members do. I will again stress that my biggest issue wasn't even with the intent of the act (though that is there a little), but with the intent of the post which, if taking his responses into account, REALLY just reeks of trying to stir some shit up.

schiller · Jun 1, 2022

Is it really so hard just to ask what SHE thinks/wants? Why is this all about your desires? The simple solution to all of this uncertainty is to ASK her.

Wolf · Jun 1, 2022

schiller said:
Is it really so hard just to ask what SHE thinks/wants? Why is this all about your desires? The simple solution to all of this uncertainty is to ASK her.

In the case of casual flirting, it's not necessary to have a discussion. Personally, I always just waited until the woman initiated that kind of contact, and there are clear signals;
She slaps you on the chest/shoulder and leans in after you tell a joke -
She leans sideways and bumps your shoulder with hers -
She puts her feet in your lap, most likely looking for a foot massage -

Basically, any kind of playful physical contact is an acceptable signal.

It's not rocket science.

primetime · Jun 2, 2022

rally said:
I will agree that the way I feel about it is part of where I had the issue, but it's a minimal part and I'm either not doing a good job of properly explaining it, or you're missing it.

The way that others see it is also relevant, but I think we're getting to the point where we're having a circular discussion. Yes, playful/platonic tickling exists. Tickling friends/co-workers/others as you've mentioned is also a thing and doesn't have to be sexual. The difference with the examples that you've provided earlier and what the OP was describing is that you're doing it with people that you have a relationship/rapport/trust with. You could argue that that "relationship" exists for two people on a date, but it's not to the degree that you likely have with your co-workers, and that difference is enough to separate the two. I also don't think that the length of the act is really relevant, nor do I think that the existence of people (who may or may not be on this forum) that don't associate tickling with sex makes this any less weird to me. A "kiss" could be a quick peck on the cheek that someone could see as an overstep. Again though, many people go into dates with no "plan" other than hope it goes well, or at least just see what happens. Going into a date and deciding, if it's going well, to give them a kiss/tickle isn't an issue. Spanking (or car crashes) are not necessarily "equivalent", but that isn't why I brought them up. I used them as examples to try and illustrate why the context of WHERE this is being discussed is where I had the major issue.

At the end of the day, none of us actually knows enough information about this situation to really make a call on whether OP was "wrong" or not. We don't know who this person he was going on a date is to him (what, if anything, they were before this), we don't know anything about her personality, and we don't know what it is about tickling that he's into. Yes we're all projecting parts of our own feelings into the situation, but my "issue" isn't with the act itself. For most people, as you're saying, you are correct. There IS no issue with any of it. But for a tickle fetishist to post on a tickling forum his pre-planned scenarios on how to tickle his date comes off, to me, as behavior that I think is a little crude. The same as if someone on a spanking forum posted about planning to smack his date on the ass, or a car crash fetishist having a plan to drive into a ditch. Whether these acts are all equivalent is debatable (except car crashes) but the context, to me, is not.

Now having said all of that, at the end of the day, whatever. I'm not going to berate the OP (or you) for having a different view on this the way that some forum members do. I will again stress that my biggest issue wasn't even with the intent of the act (though that is there a little), but with the intent of the post which, if taking his responses into account, REALLY just reeks of trying to stir some shit up.

Yes, it is a circular discussion, but here is the thing. I completely understand the viewpoint of those who for some reason think what the OP is doing is wrong. These type of responses happen all the time. What I am trying to bring is the different perspective. There is one key element that is really being missed. You can plan all day and night long, but what really matters is the execution of the plan. Just like a man imagines having sex with a co-worker, friend, hooker, whoever, and asks the woman out on dates, etc, unless he actually executes the plan, it is simply "thinking and planning". He only wants to do a one second poke. He likes to tickle. He wants to see her reaction as he gets a thrill out of it. People think this is wrong, but the one key thing is, the date *must* go a certain way to which he acknowledges. The flow and atmosphere has to be right for him to even do it. Honestly, if the date is going well, and the vibe is there for him to even try it, what is truly wrong with it? It is a tickle. It is not a prolonged tickling. It is not a "I will tie her down and tickle her until she pisses herself" type move. It is a quick poke to see how she reacts to their obviously playful interaction. From the tone of the post, if the date is boring, not going well, or no chemistry, he won't even attempt it. You have to see tickling can be seen as flirtation. "But he PLANNED it." Yeah, and?

Here is the thing about saying that the OP wanted to stir things up. Why does it stir people up? When I first saw the post, I just shrugged and moved on. But others saw fit to react in a negative way. You see this a lot on this forum. That is why I even said I thought about doing something like that, to get people all riled up because they really go ballistic if something innocuous as the OP's post is not fitting in their viewpoint. It is the truth. We can all agree that assault is bad. But wanting to tickle your date when the two people are really vibing with one another? It's a bit overreactive.

DkTwrGunSlnger · Jun 3, 2022

Establish a relationship somewhat before seeking the kink.

Ankhlet · Jun 7, 2022

Hmm, if someone poked my ribs, I’d think they were being flirty, not that they had any kind of kink. To me, that kind of tickling is very different from ummmm… more sexual stuff, lol. On a first date, it wouldn’t bother me if someone did that to see my reaction. And my reaction to having my ribs poked is nothing like my reaction to more intimate tickles. Just my opinion!

Libertine · Jun 7, 2022

DkTwrGunSlnger said:
Establish a relationship somewhat before seeking the kink.

I'll have to disagree, which is what makes this 'hobby' so difficult. If you've invested the time and the feelings to establish a relationship, what happens if she's perfect in every way but hates your kink and is unwilling to try? I was married to a woman like that for seven years and it wasn't much fun.

No, to be fair to both parties (and one doesn't have to make A Big Speech about it) subtly introduce it pretty much from the beginning as a part of lovemaking. Otherwise it would be the same as successfully wooing a liberal, then inviting her down the basement to view your Third Reich Memorabilia collection.

brotherted · Jun 12, 2022

primetime said:
Rally, I disagree with you in terms of this being a false equivalence. It is not. What truly is the difference between planning a kiss or maybe even getting laid and a quick one second poke to tickle? Really think about it. That is not "forcing your fetish" on someone....

This is a much needed discussion. It is good to see the different perspectives without cussing each other out. haha

Thanks for such thoughtful articulation.

Me thinking about a kiss on a date, or me thinking about a one second poke on a date -- with both actions predicated on accurate, empathic, non-austistic reading of the other person before and afterward -- are not materially different. The tortured argumentation that those two things are a world apart -- because the kiss is utterly normal, whereas the poke implies rapey, selfish, deluded narcissism -- just doesn't make sense in the real world. If the other person doesn't like it, she'll just say do or otherwise indicate that via body language, and then you don't repeat it. It's not complicated.

My intent of the OP was a discussion of how many have done this, and/or a discussion of the percentages of women responding vs. not responding, and/or stories -- not the "I'm better than you" virtue signaling contest that ensued. (It's funny to read people telling me what my intent was.)

And a post script: Since then I had a date with a different woman where she was the first to tickle me. I didn't bother to inform her what a monster she was for trying that without knowing if I'd like it, as I've now learned in this thread. 😂😂😂

pacattack · Jun 12, 2022

brotherted said:
If things are going well, which means we establish a joking, teasing conversational flow and repartee, I'll take a break at some point and either go to the bathroom or go to get more drinks... and when I return, I'll apply my initial, patented, split second, one index finger unexpectedly into each of her sides move.

If I get: "Why did you do that? I hate to be tickled?" I'll just shrug, charmingly say it was an accident with a grin, and move on.
If I get a positive reaction, I'll say with the same grin, "Obviously you feel guilty about something, and I'm sure to get it out of you somehow."
If I get no reaction at all, I'll think, "Ugh."

Thoughts?

Soooooo..... how did that work out for you on your date, anyway?

Phineas · Jun 12, 2022

I didn't bother to inform her what a monster she was for trying that without knowing if I'd like it, as I've now learned in this thread.

No, no. You don't understand. You're a man. That's totally different, you see. /s

Anyway, bravo on this most elaborate troll. Thread went exactly as I would have expected it all around.

Wolf · Jun 12, 2022

Phineas said:
No, no. You don't understand. You're a man. That's totally different, you see. /s

Anyway, bravo on this most elaborate troll. Thread went exactly as I would have expected it all around.

You're late. The what about men? whining has moved on to the horrors of Marvel movies.

And a troll is only a good troll if people don't know it's a trolling right off the bat.

Hiphophooray2 · Jun 14, 2022

Myriads said:
If this was a person you had been out with a few times and had formed a rapport with, and things seemed to be going somewhere then your idea is not utterly unreasonable.

On a first date? Crossing any touch boundary uninvited is pretty much a hard no-go zone. It still falls firmly under TMF Fetish rules #1 DON'T TOUCH STRANGERS. Just don't.

Also your action makes you instantly a de-facto bad actor in the realm of veracity. "It was just an accident." "Yah right you poked both my sides at once by accident. How the fuck did that happen?" This is how you destroy trust before it even forms.

A reason why this happens is a function of men's viewpoint, and to use a specific term that has been totally corrupted; privilege. You get to move through your life without anyone trying to cop a feel, bump you in the elevator with their crotch, have randoms try to touch your hair arms or anything else. It's an unseen privilege that you hold that you get to live your life as a male without this sort of behavior coming at you. Most women don't. They get that shit all the time, some daily.

I can't speak for everybody, but I've had many instances where females "bump into", grope, fondle, pench, squeeze and any other such touchy Feely maneuvers to me by golly. Some I was ok with , others not so much.

My first date strategy for tonight

TMF Regular

Verified

TMF Expert

Verified

2nd Level Orange Feather

Level of Lime Feather

4th Level Indigo Feather

Verified

TMF Expert

Verified

TMF Expert

TMF Novice

4th Level Indigo Feather

Verified

Registered User

TMF Novice

Verified

Verified

TMF Master

1st Level Orange Feather

4th Level Indigo Feather

TMF Regular