• 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

Anyone ever thought about becoming a pedicurist, specifically for tickling?

If you say so. However the subject under discussion was getting into the business specifically for the purpose of fondling women's feet and getting off on it.

Now, if you sought out the glamorous life of a service station attendant because watching people pump gas got your motor going (so to speak) then yes, I think you might have a problem.

Your argument all along has been that it's not a problem if the person in question never gives you any indication that it's happening. So again, if you don't know about it, why? How is a doctor who gives you a gynecological exam because it turns him on being any less invasive than a doctor who puts a camera in his dressing room for the same reason - as long as you don't know about either one?

What I hear in your argument is that you would freak out if you found out about the camera. And therefore it's wrong. But would you not be similarly freaked if you learned that your doctor was getting an erection while you were in the stirrups? If so then what's the difference?

If you sincerely don't see the difference, then I don't know how else to explain it to you. But I don't believe that to be the case. You're not an idiot. A picture is different than a thought. Period. I'm not beating this dead horse. Feel free to disagree with me, but I'm through repeating myself.
 
So, it's not a matter of an errant thought coming unbidden in the course of a normal day. It's about someone coming to work each day specifically to get his hands on women's feet because it turns him on.

It does "turn me on" to get my hands on womens feet , not sexually , but in a gratifying way. This is why I chose to help women (and men) with their foot issues.
If it doesn't turn you on to do this , the job can be horrible to say the least.
 
If you sincerely don't see the difference, then I don't know how else to explain it to you. But I don't believe that to be the case. You're not an idiot. A picture is different than a thought. Period. I'm not beating this dead horse. Feel free to disagree with me, but I'm through repeating myself.

Skip, we are not talking about THOUGHTS here. This is about getting a job to gratify a fetish! It involves touching, using someone for their pleasure without their consent. It is different if someone during his or her job happens to see someone that he or she thinks is hot and then has fantasies about the person, nobody can help that. But you can help getting into a job for the only purpose to get sexual gratification! That is wrong unless you are a prostitute, porn star or something like that!
 
It does "turn me on" to get my hands on womens feet , not sexually , but in a gratifying way. This is why I chose to help women (and men) with their foot issues.
If it doesn't turn you on to do this , the job can be horrible to say the least.

That's how it should be. And believe me please, when I discussed here, I never did have the feeling you are doing something wrong! 🙂
 
Skip, we are not talking about THOUGHTS here.

Yes, yes we are.

This is about getting a job to gratify a fetish! It involves touching, using someone for their pleasure without their consent. It is different if someone during his or her job happens to see someone that he or she thinks is hot and then has fantasies about the person, nobody can help that. But you can help getting into a job for the only purpose to get sexual gratification! That is wrong unless you are a prostitute, porn star or something like that!

I can clearly see that we're not going to change eachother's minds. I think this discussion has run it's course. No one is saying anything new, and we're not agreeing. I think it's time to agree to disagree.
 
Yes, yes we are.

No, we're not. Do try reading the original topic again.

Person with tickling fetish gets job as pedicurist.

Person tickles clients to gratify said fetish, even though tickling clients is not part of what a pedicurist does.

Unless said person is Charles Xavier, the tickling was not in said person's mind.

You'll get no arguments from me that something that stays solely within your head is your own business, but that is not how the discussion started.
 
Good point

No, we're not. Do try reading the original topic again.

Person with tickling fetish gets job as pedicurist.

Person tickles clients to gratify said fetish, even though tickling clients is not part of what a pedicurist does.

Unless said person is Charles Xavier, the tickling was not in said person's mind.

You'll get no arguments from me that something that stays solely within your head is your own business, but that is not how the discussion started.

Denying (or at least conveniently overlooking) the physical contact in the OP's oh so clever idea makes it easier to defend it with the "you can't police other people's thoughts"...argument.
 
No, we're not. Do try reading the original topic again.

Person with tickling fetish gets job as pedicurist.

Person tickles clients to gratify said fetish, even though tickling clients is not part of what a pedicurist does.

Unless said person is Charles Xavier, the tickling was not in said person's mind.

You'll get no arguments from me that something that stays solely within your head is your own business, but that is not how the discussion started.

The tickling is not what people are pissed off about. The sexual gratification is what makes it an issue. If someone without a tickling fetish tickled women during pedicures just because he thought the reaction was funny, no one would call him skeevy or cowardly. The action isn't the problem. The thoughts are. So again, we're talking about thoughts.
 
The tickling is not what people are pissed off about. The sexual gratification is what makes it an issue. If someone without a tickling fetish tickled women during pedicures just because he thought the reaction was funny, no one would call him skeevy or cowardly. The action isn't the problem. The thoughts are. So again, we're talking about thoughts.

Someone who just tickled women because he thinks it's funny would most likely not do it very often, because people who get tickled too much and deliberately in a pedicure would be pissed off pretty quickly and not visit that pedicurist anymore. Nobody would risk losing a customer "just for fun".

It is common that pedicurists try everything to avoid tickling a customer. So if a pedicurist does the contrary, that's not what the customer expects and wants.....amd they would look for another pedicurist.
 
Fair enough. So, let's say your OB/GYN went into the business because he likes fondling women. But he doesn't let on in any way that you notice. He just sets up a hidden camera in his exam room so he can tape you undressing, and record the exam for his private enjoyment later.

At what point does this cross the line? When he turns on the camera? When he shares the film on the gynecology fetish forum? Or is everything OK as long as you don't know about it and you aren't made to feel uncomfortable?

It crossed the line when it left his head. When he turned on the camera, when he touched her inappropriately, when he went skeevy in his voice or face. That's when it crossed the line.

I guess everyone in the world is just everyone else's cum sponge, (physical contact included) as long as no one has to admit it.

Well, yes. I walk around a shopping mall in a low-cut top, and some teenage punk might notice my breasts and fantasize about them later. Pretending such things never happen seems a tad naive.

We're not talking about enjoying doing your job, like my hairdresser friend who loves doing hair, and making people feel beautiful. We're talking about someone getting sexual pleasure from what they're doing, without the other person's consent,under the pretense of providing a professional service. It's a lot closer to rubbing up against someone on the subway. But a little more cowardly.

No, again! Rubbing up against someone on the subway is a violation of their body and personal space. Thinking unclean thoughts while you do your job is not.

This comment actually reminded me of this oldie but goodie from Dan Savage. The upshot is that we get weirdly uptight about enjoyment that is sexual vs. enjoyment of any other kind, and somehow only the former is wrong.

Standards of professional behavior are usually set within the profession. And I don't know of any non-sexual profession that considers it all right to derive sexual satisfaction from a customer.

In any profession, a professional might get more enjoyment out of working with an attractive customer than an unattractive one. And we don't beat them up for thinking the client was cute, even if they do proceed to unclean thoughts later.

I don't see how you can justify the idea that going into that profession "for the express purpose of" such enjoyment is extra-wrong. Take a surgeon who does breast augmentations. Surely he has an aesthetic sense of what nice breasts look like, presumably because he likes them himself? Do we say that as long as his interest is purely aesthetic, it's okay? But if he creates sexy breasts and likes them for being sexy, it's not okay? But if they're "beautiful," then it is okay? Aaaaaaarrrrrrgggh!

I think it's obvious that it's morally wrong, but of course there is no such thing as thought police and people think some pretty fucked up shit.

I don't think it's obvious. I think I viscerally find it icky, but what I find icky does not define what is or is not moral. I think that fantasies that stay solely inside a person's head, with no outward manifestation, cannot be considered immoral, and certainly are not comparable to a physical violation of someone's person.

To throw in one more familiar example: plenty of people have tickling fantasies around here. 😛 If you write a story about another TMF member, it's kosher to ask their permission. You would certainly do so before taking their picture, even if you never intended to post it. But if you wanted to make yourself comfortable with pleasant thoughts of another TMFer from afar, would you feel obligated to send them a PM first to seek permission for having arousing thoughts? That would be a tad ridiculous, would it not?
 
Again, I've been judged to be insufficiently non-judgmental...

Well, yes. I walk around a shopping mall in a low-cut top, and some teenage punk might notice my breasts and fantasize about them later. Pretending such things never happen seems a tad naive.

And removing physical contact from the equation, (as has been the whole basis of this thread) to make it okay is a tad intellectually dishonest.

I'm really getting sick of the people on one side of this argument being labeled prudes just because we care about other people's personal space and boundaries.

My objection to the OP's plan is based on two simple concepts: Physical Contact and Consent.

Look, I don't give two shits about what someone thinks. I've had plenty of thoughts that would land me in jail, if thinking about illegal behavior was illegal.
And I don't give two shits about what someone does, with another consenting adult. However, when you take away the knowledge that it's a sexual situation (at least for one party), you are taking away the opportunity to give (or not give) consent to be touched for such a purpose. Some people, are apparently flattered by the prospect of such attention, even finding out after the fact (where's the mutual enjoyment in that? That's their issue. Let them seek that kind of attention. Other people, like a lot of people I know, would not be. They're not prudes just because they don't want a stranger's hands on them for that kind of purpose (without them knowing about it) even though the person would enjoy it sooo much, and wants to sooo bad....
Someone else's desire to do what they want does not overpower someone else's personal space. Unless you're reading a bodice-ripper romance novel.

And I happen to love Dan Savage. I'm the lucky husband of a GGG wife (If you don't know what that means, read his column. You'll be glad you did). But even the guy who wrote Skipping to Gomorrah has had a few things to say about consent, and boundaries.
 
Someone who just tickled women because he thinks it's funny would most likely not do it very often, because people who get tickled too much and deliberately in a pedicure would be pissed off pretty quickly and not visit that pedicurist anymore. Nobody would risk losing a customer "just for fun".

It is common that pedicurists try everything to avoid tickling a customer. So if a pedicurist does the contrary, that's not what the customer expects and wants.....amd they would look for another pedicurist.

This is so very true. I lost many clients years ago due to my inexperience and the fact I didn't know how to give a proper pedicure without potentially tickling someones feet.
I've pissed off many women in the past and , of course , they never came back.
Don't get me wrong, I still tickle womens feet quite often when its unavoidable, but if I put intentional tickling in my pedicure proceedures, I would be out of buisness.
I only give my friends ticklish pedicures and get many compliments on the job how my pedicures don't tickle as much as those from the " chinese " women.
If they only knew how much I loved tickling.
 
I'm really getting sick of the people on one side of this argument being labeled prudes just because we care about other people's personal space and boundaries.

I believe you're the 1st person to even remotely suggest that the people on that side of the argument are prudes. Redmage? A prude? Come on now...

This is a debate, I get that. But why does that mean it has to resort to name-calling? Can we not disagree without someone's feelings being hurt? I thought we were all adults here...
 
My objection to the OP's plan is based on two simple concepts: Physical Contact and Consent.

Look, I don't give two shits about what someone thinks. I've had plenty of thoughts that would land me in jail, if thinking about illegal behavior was illegal.
And I don't give two shits about what someone does, with another consenting adult. However, when you take away the knowledge that it's a sexual situation (at least for one party), you are taking away the opportunity to give (or not give) consent to be touched for such a purpose. Some people, are apparently flattered by the prospect of such attention, even finding out after the fact (where's the mutual enjoyment in that? That's their issue. Let them seek that kind of attention. Other people, like a lot of people I know, would not be. They're not prudes just because they don't want a stranger's hands on them for that kind of purpose (without them knowing about it) even though the person would enjoy it sooo much, and wants to sooo bad....
Someone else's desire to do what they want does not overpower someone else's personal space. Unless you're reading a bodice-ripper romance novel.

That about sums up what the problem is about!
 
seems a bit creepy to me. I mean the OP wants to do it specifically for that reason. ugh, thats like a pedophile becoming a pediatrician cause he gets sexual gratification from touching kids. as long as he conducts himself professionally its alright. thats not such a comforting thought. Sorry, I don't mean to like say its the SAME, but i mean, someone could use that too right?

Too many people these days find weird ways to satisfy their fetishes. Poor kids on youtube are being "dared" why do I find that junk when I just search tickling?? People videotaping peoples feet unknowlingly. I don't know.

just posting my thoughts-
 
seems a bit creepy to me. I mean the OP wants to do it specifically for that reason. ugh, thats like a pedophile becoming a pediatrician cause he gets sexual gratification from touching kids. as long as he conducts himself professionally its alright. thats not such a comforting thought. Sorry, I don't mean to like say its the SAME, but i mean, someone could use that too right?

Too many people these days find weird ways to satisfy their fetishes. Poor kids on youtube are being "dared" why do I find that junk when I just search tickling?? People videotaping peoples feet unknowlingly. I don't know.

just posting my thoughts-
That's worse than the date rape comparison.
 
Don't begin to include children in this discussion. That's disgusting and I refuse to take part in it.

No need to. You've both answered my question and proven my point. I'll take "moral relativism" for $1000, Alex.
 
That's worse than the date rape comparison.

And, unfortunately, I predicted this type of behavior in advance. Some people like to take things entirely out of their original context just to enforce some self-righteous judgment on individuals.

For example,
Originally Posted by taptoematt View Post
Why should she care ? If I'm professional and not doing anything illegal, how and why can she police whats going on in my head?

After listening to many of these crazy debates in philosophy classes, I can say with absolute certainty this is exactly where the conversation is going. This is only a hypothetical too! HA!

The only thing I can say is a lot of people have their own anxieties about sexual issues, especially when they know someone is thinking something sexual about them.

The problem is they never admit its their personal problem because they simply can't accept the fact that other people have their own minds and can think how they want about them in any given context. So, they project their own issues onto others under the guise of "ethics" in order to implant the same shame and guilt they feel about sex. Parents do this to their kids all the time with sexual issues and that stranger danger bullshit... AND by using extreme arguments and "fear tactics" to drive home their message.

Watch, someone might read this and say "yeah, well you go to the Hersey factory where some nutjob with a Hersey fetish secretly gets off to you while you're pulling a Costanza on that sundae!"

I'd just like to say, I called it ahead of time! lol.

Why? After all, what difference does it make what's going on in his head, as long as he behaves professionally, right?

Exactly. As long as he doesn't act on his desire its okay for him to continue with his profession. And, yes, it is okay for people to have minds of their own. Referring back to the original example, I don't think someone who's entirely healthy would want to pursue a career as a pedicurist JUST to tickle women, but these things happen and its not your place to deny people the right to find out for themselves what is right or wrong. People learn by mistakes and if you're not making them you're not learning anything. There's no need to enforce these petty forms of ethics when we assume people naturally learn from their own experience. (The reason for this is, by logical necessity, you'd have to assume that people are naturally immoral to enforce any kind of ethics. Basically, you'd be saying that people don't learn from experience and people do not naturally incline towards what is good. In other words, ethics is a tool of pessimists.)

Also, if you're that interested in child molesters, I recommend you read something many counselors refer too. Quickes: The Brief HandBook of Sex Therapy, pg. 250.

You know, if you're really the ethicist you claim to be, then you'd be rightly ashamed of everything you've said and you're overall attitude after reading a copy of Howard Becker's book Outsiders: Studies in The Sociology Of Deviance. Even though you're intention is to deter people from doing things which are harmful, you fail to realize you're actually enforcing the exact behavior you wish to avoid.
 
Last edited:
What's New
10/8/25
The TMF Welcome Forum has a place for you to say hello! Take a moment and introduce yourself!

Door 44
Live Camgirls!
Live Camgirls
Streaming Videos
Pic of the Week
Pic of the Week
Congratulations to
*** brad1704 ***
The winner of our weekly Trivia, held every Sunday night at 11PM EST in our Chat Room
Top