Being sexually excited by seeing minors tickled - is it wrong?

[Wolf]

I can't quote any studies

Can you post/link your peer-reviewed studies, please?

But I can speak from experience, having spent several years as a Corrections Officer; there is, in fact, a social system within most penal facilities, with a fairly rigid heirarchy;
Mass Murderers/Cop Killers/'Celebrity' Killers (either those who were famous first, or those who became famous after the fact) are at the top, and Child Molesters/Child Killers at the bottom.
Most of the 'bottom tier' have to be housed in Special or Segregated Housing units, away from the General Population.

The vast majority of inmates have children, after all.

 

[Deleted member 66627]

So..Can we pretty much agree that if it's actually physically done to a child..it's bad?

 

[Sleepy Jean]

Using a child for sexual gratification, whether from actual contact or as a visual stimulus (based on another fetish), is pedophilia. They're not the same, but that doesn't make it right. Pedophilia is a mental disorder. Child Molestation is an action. No one is breaking the law by fantasizing about whatever they fantasize about. You're comparing a mental disorder (Pedophilia) with an action (having sex with a 10-year old). By the way, you can't 'have sex' with a 10-year old. They are incapable of giving consent. You can sexually assault one, however.

Well, we're splitting hairs when we talk about "having sex" versus "sexual assault." I think you know what I mean.

If someone is producing child pornography he/she should be locked up. But should someone who's only using it to go solo be locked up? And what about someone who just gets aroused watching children tickle each other? I had 2 brothers and 2 sisters and we would gang up on one (usually one of us girls) and tickle her/him with wild abandon. Who's committing a crime in that case? The child ticklers? The guy watching them? What?

If all a guy wants to do is get his rocks off seeing children being tickled with no sexual abuse involved, that's hardly a reason to call 9-1-1.

 

[Sleepy Jean]

if youre a pedophile then youre a little bitch and should die and burn in hell

END OF STORY

Were you the captain of the debating team in school?

A closed mind is a wonderful thing to lose.

 

[Wolf]

Splitting Hairs vs. Using Another Head...

Well, we're splitting hairs when we talk about "having sex" versus "sexual assault." I think you know what I mean.

If someone is producing child pornography he/she should be locked up. But should someone who's only using it to go solo be locked up? And what about someone who just gets aroused watching children tickle each other? I had 2 brothers and 2 sisters and we would gang up on one (usually one of us girls) and tickle her/him with wild abandon. Who's committing a crime in that case? The child ticklers? The guy watching them? What?

If all a guy wants to do is get his rocks off seeing children being tickled with no sexual abuse involved, that's hardly a reason to call 9-1-1.

Granted, possessing child pornography is different than producing; but possessing is being a part of the marketplace, is it not?
The 'child-on-child' scenario is innocent, and frankly, unrelated to the argument. We're talking about adults who 'get off' in some way regarding children...NOT the children themselves.....

Is it wrong to 'get off' on watching them? Maybe...but you can't look into someone else's mind and know what's getting them off, now can you? If he has pics on his hard drive,then you can tell.

 

[xSamanthax]

But I can speak from experience, having spent several years as a Corrections Officer; there is, in fact, a social system within most penal facilities, with a fairly rigid heirarchy;
Mass Murderers/Cop Killers/'Celebrity' Killers (either those who were famous first, or those who became famous after the fact) are at the top, and Child Molesters/Child Killers at the bottom.
Most of the 'bottom tier' have to be housed in Special or Segregated Housing units, away from the General Population.

The vast majority of inmates have children, after all.

Oh I know the sentiment exists. My uncle went to prison for 15+ years (not long enough imo) for murdering an infant via neglect and abuse (after killing my aunt and getting away with it). He had to be kept out of gen. pop. for most of his time there for his own protection. And...well let's just say I know more than a couple of people who have been in and out of the system over the years, lol.

Prison has it's own unique social systems. A kind of "honor among thieves" exists. Some things you just don't do. Kids is one of those things.

I just wanted to see the proof of his claim of having actual studies. =)

 

[giggle-maker]

Hard to measure. I have heard numbers of around 10% of pedophiles are females. But it's hard to say if those numbers are accurate. I'll keep looking and post if I find anything solid.

If you expand that to include pederasty (where the kid is post-pubescent), it's a larger number. Problem with this particular part is that no one sees it as wrong. What you hear is that the young man that the teacher seduced is a lucky sumbitch.

This is exactly why I put it out there. I was tickled alot by my babysitter when I was 7 years old. I liked it and she was somewhat attractive. I wasn't emotionaly scarred or anything like that.

The fact of the matter is, there IS an existing difference. If a young boy is molested by a man that young boy would be emotionaly scarred by it.

But as far as my personal experiance goes, if I was molested, not tickled, but actually molested, by my female semi good looking babysitter (she was 18 I think, so 7 year old male and 18 year old female) I wouldn't consider myself "molested".

Actually "lucky sumbitch" would pretty much be spot-on.

 

[Wolf]

I get your point, but here's a curveball for ya;

This is exactly why I put it out there. I was tickled alot by my babysitter when I was 7 years old. I liked it and she was somewhat attractive. I wasn't emotionaly scarred or anything like that.

The fact of the matter is, there IS an existing difference. If a young boy is molested by a man that young boy would be emotionaly scarred by it.

But as far as my personal experiance goes, if I was molested, not tickled, but actually molested, by my female semi good looking babysitter (she was 18 I think, so 7 year old male and 18 year old female) I wouldn't consider myself "molested".

Actually "lucky sumbitch" would pretty much be spot-on.

What if, after that molestation, you started acting out sexually with your peers at school...you know, the 7 and 8 year old girls, since you enjoyed it, why wouldn't they, right? What if someone then reported you? You see where I'm going with this? Actions are like pebbles in a pond...they make ripples.....

 

[giggle-maker]

What if, after that molestation, you started acting out sexually with your peers at school...you know, the 7 and 8 year old girls, since you enjoyed it, why wouldn't they, right? What if someone then reported you? You see where I'm going with this? Actions are like pebbles in a pond...they make ripples.....

That'd make for one helluva news story, but I get where you're comming from. honestly, I don't know if I would act on it with others my age. Maybe/maybe not. It's all hypothetical.

 

[Artoo]

if youre a pedophile then youre a little bitch and should die and burn in hell

END OF STORY

If you're a tickle fetishist then you're a little bitch and should die and burn in hell...

Don't you see how ridiculous that sounds? There is a difference between paedophiles and child molesters, though it's true that they both overlap. Generalisation much? 🙄

 

[Whacky Macky]

Wow, what an amazing thread. I just read through everything, and it's amazing. LD Tickler, you have my support and admiration. What really got to me (and others, as evidenced by the posts) was not the hard-line opinion held by some that all sexual arousal by child tickling was abhorrent, but by the overzealous, fanatical witch-hunt-esque tirades that ensued in the making of their points. Granted, contact with children by proxy of being a parent, uncle etc. colours one's perspective, but still....

Imagine this: I see a video clip of a foot being tickled. It is a female foot, soft and attractive in all the ways we find attractive. Then, the camera pulls back and it is a child's foot. Do I stop being attracted? It's the same foot. This question has kept me awake long nights. I'm not a monster, I know that. Am I only the sum of my thoughts?

 

[venray]

Imagine this: I see a video clip of a foot being tickled. It is a female foot, soft and attractive in all the ways we find attractive. Then, the camera pulls back and it is a child's foot. Do I stop being attracted? It's the same foot. This question has kept me awake long nights. I'm not a monster, I know that. Am I only the sum of my thoughts?

Imagine this: You see a clip of a foot being tickled. Soft and attractive in all the ways you find attractive. The camera pulls back and it is a male foot being tickled. Do you stop being attracted? It is the same foot.....

Food for thought......

 

[Deleted member 66627]

Imagine this: You see a clip of a foot being tickled. Soft and attractive in all the ways you find attractive. The camera pulls back and it is a male foot being tickled. Do you stop being attracted? It is the same foot.....

Food for thought......

Oh my god...

That is an amazing post, man. SPOT on..but still........

 

[Wolf]

Damn good points, all right

Imagine this: You see a clip of a foot being tickled. Soft and attractive in all the ways you find attractive. The camera pulls back and it is a male foot being tickled. Do you stop being attracted? It is the same foot.....

Food for thought......

Which basically boils down the argument to, What about the scenario is stimulating to you? The activity? The age of the participants? The body parts? The monkey, wearing a life jacket? Or the fact that a dwarf is filming it all? That's really a question that only the individual, if they're honest with themselves, can answer. And that's where right and wrong come into play.

But I'm not answering any questions about the monkey.

 

[Sleepy Jean]

you can't look into someone else's mind and know what's getting them off, now can you?

No. but you can look at his midsection and figure out what's in his mind.

It's the producers of child pornography who are really hurting kids and should have the book thrown at them. The users should not be punished nearly as severely.

 

[giggle-maker]

No. but you can look at his midsection and figure out what's in his mind.

It's the producers of child pornography who are really hurting kids and should have the book thrown at them. The users should not be punished nearly as severely.

Itotaly agree with you here. What is the punishment for producing child porn anyway?

 

[xSamanthax]

Itotaly agree with you here. What is the punishment for producing child porn anyway?

Federal (USA) guidelines:

Federal Child Pornography Statutes

18 USC § 2251
Production of child pornography (mandatory min. 15 yrs; max 30 years)

18 USC § 2251A
Selling or buying children for sexual exploitation (mandatory min. 30 yrs; max life)

18 USC § 2252
Possession, distribution and receipt of child pornography (mandatory min 5 yrs for distribution or receipt; max 20 years)

18 USC § 2260
Importation of child pornography (max 10 years)

 

[LD_Tickler]

I need to respond to too many people, so I'm not using the quote function.

Crystal You're right, love is probably something that would compel a person to come out. But choosing to come out (that is, choosing to announce and acknowledge your feelings), and choosing to be gay (that is deciding which gender you think is hot) are not even close to the same thing. So I still don't understand what you meant when you said that love is something that would make a person choose to be gay.

Crystal again Yes, we all agree that actually molesting children in real space and time is a no-no.

Vsa7a The way you make judgements is actually what's wrong with the world. We, as humans, have both a rational faculty and an emotional/instinctive one. It's our only truly unique characteristic as a life forms as far as I know, so try and use it one of these days.

Wolf and Sleepy Jean Posessing is as bad as producing, when it comes to child porn. Feeding the industry is indirectly contributing to exploitation of children, so it counts as an action. The element of innocence is in the mere fact of arousal - that arousal is not wrong. What you do to satisfy it can be though, and buying child porn counts in that field.

Open question to those of you who still think it's wrong to to have pedophilic fantasies: Why isn't it wrong for us to have abduction & tickle torture fantasies?

 

[Deleted member 66627]

So I still don't understand what you meant when you said that love is something that would make a person choose to be gay.

If someone is really and truly 'in love' with someone, regardless of their sexual preference, they are going to feel more of a need to express that feeling.

So, if you're gay and closeting it.. BUT meet someone, and end up falling in love with them, wouldn't you want to let the one's you care about know?

I meant 'come out' not 'choose to be'. Bad wording on my part, I apologize.

 

[Ticklshchic03]

If someone is really and truly 'in love' with someone, regardless of their sexual preference, they are going to feel more of a need to express that feeling.

So, if you're gay and closeting it.. BUT meet someone, and end up falling in love with them, wouldn't you want to let the one's you care about know?

I meant 'come out' not 'choose to be'. Bad wording on my part, I apologize.

what don't you get LD? I think she's made it clear...

 

[SlaverTickler]

Uh yeah...

That has to be about the dumest thing anybody has ever asked in the entire time I have been here. Unless someone has asked "Is it wrong to burn a cross on my neighbours front lawn?" and I missed it... and even then I am not sure that us dumber. If I were you I would start seeing a shrink, and getting on some sort of medication before you hurt somebody.

 

[cloudgazer2k]

That has to be about the dumest thing anybody has ever asked in the entire time I have been here. Unless someone has asked "Is it wrong to burn a cross on my neighbours front lawn?" and I missed it... and even then I am not sure that us dumber. If I were you I would start seeing a shrink, and getting on some sort of medication before you hurt somebody.

uh, Slaver...have you even read the thread? the OP was asking a question, and i doubt it has anything to do with his own lifestyle.

 

[Deleted member 66627]

That has to be about the dumest thing anybody has ever asked in the entire time I have been here. Unless someone has asked "Is it wrong to burn a cross on my neighbours front lawn?" and I missed it... and even then I am not sure that us dumber. If I were you I would start seeing a shrink, and getting on some sort of medication before you hurt somebody.

Yeah, hon.

I know it's lengthy. But you're totally missing the point of the thread.

 

[SlaverTickler]

Oh um...

Sorry, I jumped the gun based on the title, but at least it's pretty clear how I feel about the entire thing.

 

[kucheeku]

You know what's interesting to me

Knowing there are a number of sick minds out there behind keyboards, I'm amazed that any families would put into you tube and expose to the world their babies filmed being tickled. To me, it's one thing to have home video of your kids while they are growing up and having those as memories--that's fine. It just seems to me to be too cringe-inducing to expose your baby to the whole world. Bleh.