My mind was wandering today. Anyway I started to wonder why do Lees like myself voluntarily allow ourselves to be tied and tickled, yet sooner rather than later are begging for the Ler to stop. Common sense would suggest that if you don't like being Tickled, why would you allow yourself to be tied up and subjected to it in the first place ? Or if you do like being tickled, what is all the pleading for mercy for ? So basically I tried to come up with an analogy of my own making, and therefore here is The Chocolate Torture.
The victim in the first instance has to be someone like me who absolutely loves chocolate (in fact make that physically craves chocolate - no joke). For the Chocolate Torture the victim is tied to a chair. Sitting alongside the victim is the torturer armed with six suitcases full of delicious milk chocolate, and an excruciatingly painful electric stun gun.
Now the torturer begin to slowly feed the victim piece after piece of delicious chocolate. Thus despite the victims nervousness about the ordeal, in the first instance the torture is is exquisitely pleasurable. However sooner rather than later (and thus my comparison with tickling) the victim cannot consume or enjoy any more chocolate (even though of course it still tastes the same, and it remains inherently pleasurable). At this point of refusal the torturer then shocks the victim with the electronic stun gun, which gives a pain so evil and unpleasant that it cannot be withstood or resisted. It is pointed out to the victim that each refusal to eat more chocolate, will result in another electric shock. Thus the victim has no choice but to keep consuming more chocolate. There will of course be sequences of nausea and sickness (the torturer will of course generously provide a bucket), at which point the victim is likely to plead he cannot eat any more. Yet further electric shocks will force the vctim to keep consuming more chocolate.
Now I am sure you will agree with me that we are now in the realms of serious torture. Yet as a thing is the last bar of chocolate any less a pleasure food item in itself than the first. Also for a chocoholic who craves chocolate, and who hasn't had any in months, is it not possible they would allow themselves to be caught up in this scenario, without fully realising the trap they are falling into.
So this make sense to anyone out there (Specifically Lee's) ?
The victim in the first instance has to be someone like me who absolutely loves chocolate (in fact make that physically craves chocolate - no joke). For the Chocolate Torture the victim is tied to a chair. Sitting alongside the victim is the torturer armed with six suitcases full of delicious milk chocolate, and an excruciatingly painful electric stun gun.
Now the torturer begin to slowly feed the victim piece after piece of delicious chocolate. Thus despite the victims nervousness about the ordeal, in the first instance the torture is is exquisitely pleasurable. However sooner rather than later (and thus my comparison with tickling) the victim cannot consume or enjoy any more chocolate (even though of course it still tastes the same, and it remains inherently pleasurable). At this point of refusal the torturer then shocks the victim with the electronic stun gun, which gives a pain so evil and unpleasant that it cannot be withstood or resisted. It is pointed out to the victim that each refusal to eat more chocolate, will result in another electric shock. Thus the victim has no choice but to keep consuming more chocolate. There will of course be sequences of nausea and sickness (the torturer will of course generously provide a bucket), at which point the victim is likely to plead he cannot eat any more. Yet further electric shocks will force the vctim to keep consuming more chocolate.
Now I am sure you will agree with me that we are now in the realms of serious torture. Yet as a thing is the last bar of chocolate any less a pleasure food item in itself than the first. Also for a chocoholic who craves chocolate, and who hasn't had any in months, is it not possible they would allow themselves to be caught up in this scenario, without fully realising the trap they are falling into.
So this make sense to anyone out there (Specifically Lee's) ?
