BDSM: The View from the Tickling World

[WorkInProgress]

As I initiate this thread, I'm not sure how active I'll be in it, because I'm starting it primarily for persons who fall into two categories, and I'm not sure I fit snugly into either of them myself. The two categories are these: (1.) persons who are into BDSM, especially forms of BDSM even more painful than spanking, and (2.) persons who, while members of the tickling community, are uncomfortable with the whole idea of the more hard-core BDSM, perhaps seeing it as a form of violence and exploitation rather than mutual satisfaction. The ideal participants in this thread are persons who, whichever of those two camps they're in, are open to dialogue with the other camp, to improve mutual understanding. The ideal use of this thread is questions and answers and expressions of candid sentiments; the non-ideal direction the thread could go in would be hostility and lecturing. The thread was, obviously, inspired by Drew70's thread.

To those uncomfortable with hard-core BDSM, what questions would you like to ask the people who are into it? What concerns do you have that you'd like them to address? And to those responding, please don't take those concerns as insults or disparagements. I think we can get some educational dialogue going here.

And, if there's anybody from outside the tickling community, more familiar with other forms of BDSM, who's lurking here to learn more about this curious little fetish called tickling, you're invited too.

And, just to start the ball rolling, I'm going to lead off with the question that I know many people have. This isn't my own question, I'm just leading off with it because I know it's the key question of persons in category one. The question: Subs--especially subs of hardcore BDSM--how do you respond to the view, held by some, that your proclivity stems from a lack of self-respect and a desire to be punished because you were conditioned to think you deserve it, and that those who engage in BDSM play with you are taking advantage of your emotionally debased condition for their own exploitative ends?

 

[Dussicar]

I like the idea of this thread.

I actually have a s00per n00b question. Sorry if it sounds dumb.

This is aimed at those into the hardcore pain: If you get into a bar fight, do you get sexually aroused? Or do you intentionally start fights and lose for that reason?

Or do you avoid fights with members of the same sex because the idea repulses you sexually?

 

[Redmage]

This is aimed at those into the hardcore pain: If you get into a bar fight, do you get sexually aroused? Or do you intentionally start fights and lose for that reason?

*sigh* No. I didn't feel any sexual urge to be a dentist either, nor do I know ANYONE who gets sexually aroused by a dental drill. That's like asking a tickling fan if he tickles children to get turned on. I mean, obviously any sort of tickling should do it, right?

Honestly, I had a hard time believing that this was a serious question. Starting and losing bar fights for sexual arousal?? It seems as though the obvious answer, to almost anyone, would be "no," and that the next thought would be "So maybe it's not just the pain that does it for them."

Sorry to be snappish, but for pity's sake. Start with the assumption that kinky people are real people, not caricatures.

 

[WorkInProgress]

Obviously, I'm not a moderator, but as the initiator of this thread, I'd like to express an opinion. I feel some responsibility here, because Dussicar's question is exactly the kind of question that I was trying to encourage, and I feel as if I set Dussicar up to be put down by initiating this thread. I was really hoping that such questions could be answered without put-downs. I really don't see what would have been so difficult about simply saying that no, there isn't any sexual arousal from being in fights, because the point isn't pain for its own sake but rather pain in the context of a very specific type of interaction or relationship.

Please, people, in this particular thread, would you please do me, the thread initiator, the personal kindness of only participating in it if you can answer questions kindly? I was really hoping this thread could be for people who are really open to this kind of dialogue. Maybe it was naive of me to attempt it, but please understand that it is Redmage's answer, rather than Dussicar's question, which gives me a personal sense of failure for what I have attempted to do.

In this particular thread, unless a question shows a clear willful hostility and intentional desire to be provocative, would you please refrain from criticizing questions and treat every question, if possible, as a genuine quest for information? And can somebody please give Dussicar's question a real answer, one which elaborates on the difference between BDSM and hostile violence? The whole purpose of this thread is the fact that there are people here who would welcome the enlightenment on those things which, to insiders, are obvious and old news.

 

[Redmage]

There's no need for you to feel like a failure on my account. I knew when I wrote it that my tone was angry. That's because I was angry. If the question had been "What is it about pain that can turn someone on? I just don't get it," then it would not have hit me that way.

But the idea that in order to enjoy these things a kinky person would have to be so alien, so dysfunctional that they would pick fights with total strangers - and then deliberately lose, no less - because that's what turned them on...well, that just took me the wrong way.

Picture it this way..."So, you've got, like, a foot fetish, right? You like the way women's feet smell? So, what, you hang around outside locker rooms hoping to get a whiff? Maybe crawl around on the floors of restaurants or something like that?"

Would that be a productive line of questioning?

I apologize for the sharpness of my tone. I'll try to keep it on a more even keel. Hopefully in return the questions will assume some basic human dignity on the part of the people being questioned.

 

[RobAce]

If I dood it I get a whuppin..............

Hey Redmage.....
you remember that conversation in the obesity thread we had about tact and its uses, understand my point now..


I dood it.


Ill be awaiting my whuppin.

(Sorry for the off-topic, trolling type post....I just like to mess with Redmage every once in a while)

To stay on topic Ill pose a question:
What kind of things are done to screen prospective slaves/master within the confines of a group setting.

Rob

 

[Redmage]

Now, as for an attempt at a real answer...

No, kinky people do not start fights in public places in order to get off. That's partly because sadomasochism is not about random violence - if you like, it's about very carefully controlled violence, but the people who do it don't see it even that way.

Most ticklers have the idea that the people involved in tickling play should be involved only by their own consent. That idea arose in parallel with (some would say it arose directly from) the concept of consensual play in BDSM. That is the difference between what we do and assault or rape.

Starting a fight with some unknowing person purely for sexual thrills would be nonconsensual. It would be using the other person like an object - little more than a vibrator with fists. It would be putting such a person at risk for injury or arrest (to say nothing of just plain ruining his night) just for one's own sexual pleasure. Anyone who would do that would need to be locked away for his own safety and the public's.

Consent among all involved is fundamental to BDSM.

 

[Redmage]

Hey Redmage.....
you remember that conversation in the obesity thread we had about tact and its uses, understand my point now..

I understood your point then; I just didn't think it applied to the situation in which you were making it. I'm actually not so sure it applies now, even. I don't know that there is a tactful way to ask a question that makes such godawful assumptions about the people it's directed to.

What kind of things are done to screen prospective slaves/master within the confines of a group setting.

I'm not quite sure what you mean, but I'll take a stab at it. If I'm not answering the question you asked, please rephrase.

Most public kink groups (the Society of Janus in San Francisco, Black Rose in the DC/VA/MD area, etc.) have an orientation process that's required of all new members. Generally it involves a general introduction to the basics of BDSM and a more specific explanation of the rules of that particular group.

Likewise most public play spaces (Passive Arts in LA, the Citadel in SF, etc.) They may not have an orientation session per se, but everyone who plays there reads and signs a copy of the club's rules. Often they're posted on the wall in various places.

That's really all the screening most BDSM groups need. As long as everyone in the group understands and agrees to the group's rules, that's all such groups usually care about.

 

[WorkInProgress]

And, thank you for that real answer, Redmage.

 

[lk70]

Obviously, I'm not a moderator, but as the initiator of this thread, I'd like to express an opinion. I feel some responsibility here, because Dussicar's question is exactly the kind of question that I was trying to encourage, and I feel as if I set Dussicar up to be put down by initiating this thread. I was really hoping that such questions could be answered without put-downs. I really don't see what would have been so difficult about simply saying that no, there isn't any sexual arousal from being in fights, because the point isn't pain for its own sake but rather pain in the context of a very specific type of interaction or relationship.

Please, people, in this particular thread, would you please do me, the thread initiator, the personal kindness of only participating in it if you can answer questions kindly? I was really hoping this thread could be for people who are really open to this kind of dialogue. Maybe it was naive of me to attempt it, but please understand that it is Redmage's answer, rather than Dussicar's question, which gives me a personal sense of failure for what I have attempted to do.

In this particular thread, unless a question shows a clear willful hostility and intentional desire to be provocative, would you please refrain from criticizing questions and treat every question, if possible, as a genuine quest for information? And can somebody please give Dussicar's question a real answer, one which elaborates on the difference between BDSM and hostile violence? The whole purpose of this thread is the fact that there are people here who would welcome the enlightenment on those things which, to insiders, are obvious and old news.

Well, WIP, I feel like you're trying to put people who are into BDSM into some kind of freak show-and-tell. I think Red was a bit justified in being angry at that question actually. I had resolved to stay out of this thread, and I still will, but I thought you'd like to know why.

I'm not inclined to sit around with "curious observers" and discuss my sex life in that sort of detail.

For those who are comfortable with it, though, rock on.

 

[RobAce]

I understood your point then; I just didn't think it applied to the situation in which you were making it. I'm actually not so sure it applies now, even. I don't know that there is a tactful way to ask a question that makes such godawful assumptions about the people it's directed to.

Understood, I just think tact is lacking in society a lot...to me there is a difference between being PC and using tact...but that is for another thread.

I'm not quite sure what you mean, but I'll take a stab at it. If I'm not answering the question you asked, please rephrase.

Well you got most of it. Another part of it stems from the knowledge that a few people that might engage in BDSM (or in tickling, or other fetishes) might do so because of some psychological problems. Are there any mental type screenings to ensure your not subbing to someone who might pose a real threat to someone.

I knew one friend that ran a private club from his home and had a week wait for people to gain admittance while he ran a background check I think I now understand why he did, which is why Im asking this. I always wondered.

Is that a typical thing or something people just do on their own accord.

Rob

 

[RobAce]

Well, WIP, I feel like you're trying to put people who are into BDSM into some kind of freak show-and-tell. I think Red was a bit justified in being angry at that question actually. I had resolved to stay out of this thread, and I still will, but I thought you'd like to know why.

I'm not inclined to sit around with "curious observers" and discuss my sex life in that sort of detail.

For those who are comfortable with it, though, rock on.

Never thought of it that way lk.
For me I was hesitant to post in this at first even though I do have some real questions.
I was afraid to post in other threads seeing the way if someone disagreed with the masses (granted the language used could have been more tactful and respectful) they were ganged up on and belittled.
I saw this thread as a chance to perhaps clear up some of my own misconceptions and thoughts about this lifestyle...that honestly I do not personally engage in nor have a inclination to...it doesn't bother me in the sense that I find it wrong or immoral, I just find it strange and to a degree silly. In other threads the venom was obvious and I stayed away...but this might give me a chance to learn something other than 2 groups of people could tear each other down if given the chance to.

I hope you do not think Im using this as my personal freak-show and that I really am attempting to ask things of members here I am comfortable with, know my mannerisms and the way I communicate and thus I will probably get a real answer instead that I will understand.

Rob

 

[lk70]

I hope you do not think Im using this as my personal freak-show and that I really am attempting to ask things of members here I am comfortable with, know my mannerisms and the way I communicate and thus I will probably get a real answer instead that I will understand.

Rob

Not at all, Rob. It's a fine idea for a thread and (IMO) if there are people who are willing to answer questions and people who are asking respectful, well thought-out questions, it's all good. I just don't think anyone who's into BDSM should be expected to tolerate insulting or ridiculous questions in the name of "greater understanding." Red had a right to feel insulted, even as Dussicar had a right to ask his question. Maybe a better response would have been "I find the question insulting and let me tell you why..." just to make it clear.

But, really, I should just SHUT THE HECK UP because I know I'm just the sort of person WIP doesn't want in this thread and I've taken it a bit off topic 🙂

 

[Noeyes]

ok back on topic

think spider webs. the differences between bondage, restraint,disipline,and s/m can be both suttle and dramatic. for the ticklers and ticklees its a matter of sometimes simple restraint to keep your playmate from wiggling away. keep this fundemental in mind if its mutual build trust or your chances of ever getting your playmate restrained agian just flew out the window.

there are folks out there who enjoy hard bondage, humilitation, pain etc. personaly I do not get the attraction. but keep in mind for a restrained ticklee it can indeed be a form of torture. with the s/m crowd if tickling figures at all its mostly foreplay, where we can envision it as the main event.

i have been involved with gals who like to push the envelope. i was involved with one at one point that did tickling with me only if she got her thrills first and she liked inflicting pain. the readeaming quality of her was she was insanely ticklish and hated it. so in my case it was payback.

I hope this helps further a real disscussion on this throney issue
Happy Tickling Noeyes

 

[WorkInProgress]

I've changed my mind about this post. I'll just be tacet for the moment and let others carry the dialogue.

 

[drew70]

I like the idea of this thread.

I actually have a s00per n00b question. Sorry if it sounds dumb.

This is aimed at those into the hardcore pain: If you get into a bar fight, do you get sexually aroused? Or do you intentionally start fights and lose for that reason?

Or do you avoid fights with members of the same sex because the idea repulses you sexually?

I don't doubt that there are people out there who would get off as you describe here, but that's not what BDSM is about, although I can sort of understand the question. If there was some kind of bizarro parallel universe in which bar fights were always tickle fights, I imagine many of us might sign up for it, and perhaps Dussicar's question might seem more valid.

Whereas most of us non-BDSM tickle people would be willing to tickle (or be tickled by) anybody on the street that looked good to us, BDSM seems to require more of a connection between the participants. Though I'm sure there are exceptions, I think for many of those who participate, it's not so much about the pain as it is about the relationship between the giver and the receiver.

The giver gets off not so much on the suffering of the receiver, but on the receiver's submission to it and her willingness to endure it for his sake. Likewise, the receiver gets off not so much on the pain itself, but that it's being administered by a loving master to whom they want and/or need to submit and please.

Again, I'm not saying this applies to everybody in BDSM, but this is something I've observed that seems to be common to many.

 

[Redmage]

Well you got most of it. Another part of it stems from the knowledge that a few people that might engage in BDSM (or in tickling, or other fetishes) might do so because of some psychological problems. Are there any mental type screenings to ensure your not subbing to someone who might pose a real threat to someone.

Definitely not. There's no one who could or would do that sort of screening.

I mean, think about what it would entail: you'd need trained mental-health professionals, experienced enough with fetishes not to call someone pathological just because the person's kinks freaked them out. Someone would have to pay for their time (and I'm pretty sure not many people would be willing to do that out of their own pockets, just to join some group), and the people being screened would each have to sit through at least a couple of hours of interviews.

Plus the fact that the whole screening process says that the group they're thinking of joining thinks they might be mentally ill. If I were presented with a process like that I'd be thinking, "What sort of people do you get, that you have to go through all of this?"

And I can't think of any mental health professional who would do that. For one thing, diagnosing a subtle mental disorder is no easy task. Generally no one would even try if there wasn't a good reason to suspect one. Just think of the liability if they miss someone, and that person goes on to hurt a member of the group. Few professionals would risk their careers on a diagnosis made after just a cursory screening process.

No, I don't know of any group that goes to such extremes. I can't see how they could if they wanted to. Even a background check would be extraordinary. Most kinksters are much too private to agree to that. Private groups and parties insist on photo ID to prove legal age, but most don't even insist on recording their members' legal names.

And yet for all that there are remarkably few problems. I've told nervous kinky women that they are safer stark naked at most play parties than they would be fully clothed in any nightclub or bar.

 

[Redmage]

Whereas most of us non-BDSM tickle people would be willing to tickle (or be tickled by) anybody on the street that looked good to us...

Um, you would? Seriously? From what I've seen of you, at least, I don't think you would, Drew. It's funny you should say that in any case. I was at a non-kinky party recently where I met a young woman. Cute as button she was, and she was setting off all my kink radar. But, radar can be wrong, so I asked her. She said that no, she wasn't into that sort of thing really. Just not her cup of tea. And just like that, my interest cooled. She was still cute, still nice to talk to, but she didn't interest me sexually any more. We chatted, I introduced her to my wife, but as soon as I learned she wasn't kinky she went from "potential play-partner" to "very nice lady that I met at a party."

If a woman isn't kinky, then I'm just not turned on by her looks alone. It's a strange thing to realize about oneself.

Though I'm sure there are exceptions, I think for many of those who participate, it's not so much about the pain as it is about the relationship between the giver and the receiver.

Very close, for someone who doesn't share the kink.

It's an overstatement to say that it's not about the pain. For some it is. But even for those it's not about pain in the abstract, but rather pain delivered by someone that they've given their consent to. For others, it's not about the pain itself at all. Rather, surrendering themselves to those sensations is a gift that they give to someone they care about. The surrender is what's important to them. And for still others it's a combination: they like pain, but only from a person with whom they have that special bond you mentioned.

And then, just to add another complication, there is the BDSM equivalent of casual sex. I've met people at play-parties and after a little chat, we just decided to go for it. Seriously, one of those conversations went just about like this...

Woman: That's a nice collection of whips you have.
Me: You like them? I got this one here, that one there, this third one the other place.
Woman (stroking a whip): That one feels nice.
Me: Would you like to try it?
Woman: Sure! There's a play-station right over here...

Like casual sex, that sort of play is just about fun. But it's still consensual, and like casual sex it can lead to other things sometimes. Of course one nice thing about it is that people seldom get pregnant from it....

The giver gets off not so much on the suffering of the receiver, but on the receiver's submission to it and her willingness to endure it for his sake. Likewise, the receiver gets off not so much on the pain itself, but that it's being administered by a loving master to whom they want and/or need to submit and please.

Er, yes.

Who the heck are you, and what have you done with Drew??

 

[RobAce]

Thanks Redmage,
that cleared up some other things I had wondered about.

If I have more Ill post them.

Er, yes.

Who the heck are you, and what have you done with Drew??

LMAO....this has to be the line of the week.

Rob

 

[LindyHopper]

Are there any mental type screenings to ensure your not subbing to someone who might pose a real threat to someone.

Redmage already answered from a logistical POV, but I think I can answer from a common-sense safety one as well.

One reason I like Gatherings is that they're an opportunity to meet and play with new people in an environment that's safe because you're surrounded by friends. BDSM playspaces are similar: they're full of like-minded individuals, with Dungeon Monitors on patrol. As soon as a sub in either location expresses distress (probably even before), he or she is surrounded by half a dozen people ready to help. That's way safer than being at a club or a bar.

As far as playing in private, any woman with a good head on her shoulders would take basic precautions: ask for references, wait a few dates to get to know him, have an emergency contact, etc. These precautions apply equally to meeting someone for tickling, BDSM, or vanilla sex.

If there was some kind of bizarro parallel universe in which bar fights were always tickle fights.....

.... that still wouldn't be nearly as bizarro as what's taking place right here in this thread. Just so you know, I think it's pretty freakin' cool. 🙂

 

[Dussicar]

Holy crapstorm, batman! Lookit the controversy I done caused...I didn't know I still had it in me.

I should explain myself:

To be brutally honest, the reason why such an "of-the-cuff" question popped into my head was due to a magazine article that I read detailing somebody who was into extreme BDSM. By that, I mean he was into severe pain! This was illustraded (by both demonstration and photos of the incident) by havin meathooks punched through his shoulder blades and protruding out his chest. He then had himself suspended fifteen feet in the air dangling off these hooks. This man was who I was thinking of when I asked such a question.

Now, Redmage made the point of responding to my question with "just because you have a tickling fetish, dosen't mean you get off tickling kids." In actuality, I was drawing upon the fact that even though I have a foot fetish, and that I also have a tickling fetish, other foot based fetishes have revolved around outright foot torture (inflicting pain and mutilation) as my reference to the question I asked.

Lastly, I should have worded the question a little better. Though I made it clear that I was asking this question in regards to the more extreme BDSM crowd, I should have asked with "do you know of any people..." or "have you heard of extreme cases in the BDSM community who has..." instead of the sweeping generalisation of saying "you" signifying that I assumed all BDSM fetishists were doing this.

In the end, I was mostly drawing upon all my knowlege of the foot/tickling community to see if such cases occur within BDSM. It's a big world and there are alway people who might be inclined to do so. I am well aware that the general BDSM community is as humane and playful as the tickling crowd. We pretty much follow the same rules...I hope this clears things up.

I didn't realise some might take me too literally.

 

[WorkInProgress]

Excellent, this thread has moved in its intended direction after a rather bumpy start. Something I'd like to point out in passing is that a question should never be translated into a dogmatic opinion, or any kind of opinion at all. Asking if something is true is worlds apart from expressing the conviction that something is true, or even the opinion that it's probably true. (This is why I would much have preferred if lk70 had asked me, as a question, whether it was my intent to make a show-and-tell freak show, rather than stating it as a theory about what's going on inside my head, but I'll let it go at that, especially since there don't seem to be others who put any such interpretation on my motives here. I would also add that, as a scholar with aspirations of writing books on race and cultural politics in modern America, I already know that I need to brace myself for having instances of feeling unfairly misunderstood in much wider spheres than this message board. In fact, as one whose approaches usually emphasize the need for opposing parties to understand each other's viewpoints better, I probably have years ahead of me of getting whacked from all sides, and probably not on the butt with a paddle.)

And now, joining in the civil dialogue, I would say that I'm not sure I concur with Drew70 that people would like bar fights any better if bar fights were tickle fights. I say that because a fight is about hostility, not anything else. When two people fight, they genuinly despise each other. I doubt any of the lees here would take pleasure in being tickled by anybody whom they despised. As a ler, I have no tickling fantasies about people who've done me ill, even if I would otherwise find them attractive. But, that's purely an opinion on my part, and should not even remotely be interpreted as a criticism of Drew70's post, because this whole latest batch of posts represents precisely the kind of dialogue I was hoping to generate, with divergent perspectives.

 

[drew70]

Um, you would? Seriously? From what I've seen of you, at least, I don't think you would, Drew. It's funny you should say that in any case.

It's true, though. Virtually every woman I see is a potential tickler in my mind unless I find her abhorant for whatever reason. This is because of childhood conditioning. I was constantly tickled by females growing up, and almost never by males. And none of it was sexual in nature, although it was gender specific. I just loved the feminine attention, and the crippling, energy-draining feeling of being tickled by them.

So for me, being tickled by women for any reason is exciting. The degree to which that excitement is sexual in nature varies with the woman, and is generally something I keep to myself, unless the tickling is done during romantic intimacy.

However, I may have erred in assuming that most people into tickling but not BDSM feel the same way.

If a woman isn't kinky, then I'm just not turned on by her looks alone. It's a strange thing to realize about oneself.

That is interesting. I guess we all have our prerequisites and our deal-breakers, no matter how open we try to be.

Very close, for someone who doesn't share the kink.

It's an overstatement to say that it's not about the pain. For some it is. But even for those it's not about pain in the abstract, but rather pain delivered by someone that they've given their consent to. For others, it's not about the pain itself at all. Rather, surrendering themselves to those sensations is a gift that they give to someone they care about. The surrender is what's important to them. And for still others it's a combination: they like pain, but only from a person with whom they have that special bond you mentioned.

And then, just to add another complication, there is the BDSM equivalent of casual sex. I've met people at play-parties and after a little chat, we just decided to go for it. Seriously, one of those conversations went just about like this...

Woman: That's a nice collection of whips you have.
Me: You like them? I got this one here, that one there, this third one the other place.
Woman (stroking a whip): That one feels nice.
Me: Would you like to try it?
Woman: Sure! There's a play-station right over here...

Like casual sex, that sort of play is just about fun. But it's still consensual, and like casual sex it can lead to other things sometimes. Of course one nice thing about it is that people seldom get pregnant from it....

What a cool story. Life is interesting as hell sometimes, isn't it? You just never know when something really cool will just fall in your lap out of the blue.

For example, whenever I get a massage, at some point it will tickle. She'll apologize, and I'll say, "Hey, it's okay. Don't let the squirming fool you. I love being tickled. Always have." Nothing creepy or inappropriate. Just planting a seed. Most of them just continue with the massage, not giving my comment a second thought. But one young lady in Dallas surprised me. After I told her that, she began to deliberately tickle me while massaging. The rest of the hour was more tickle torture than massage. She got a good tip that day.

Who the heck are you, and what have you done with Drew??

LOL. I hear you, man. It's kind of scary for me, too.

.... that still wouldn't be nearly as bizarro as what's taking place right here in this thread. Just so you know, I think it's pretty freakin' cool. 🙂

Why thank you. Yeah, it's crazy, but it feels right to me. What can I say?