• 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

Consensual vs. non-consensual.. a debate

LayDeeMe

TMF Novice
Joined
May 20, 2001
Messages
52
Points
0
I need some help understanding something here. I was voting on some of the polls when I saw this one. I guess what I don't understand is- what does a nonconsensual tickle consist of? Why would you ever want to tickle someone who is nonconsensual? Or am I totally misunderstanding?? If someone does not want to be tickled, why would you? I understand how tickling someone who is consensual goes from consensual to nonconsensual in a way, but to tickle someone who doesn't want it at ALL from the get-go is... rather incomprehensible to me. I guess I just come from the "treat others as you would be treated" frame of mind (i.e. if you didn't want someone driving your car, or having sex with you, or touching you, or sleeping on your couch without paying rent, you wouldn't do any of those things to another person.)

Please let me know if I am totally misunderstanding. Thanks!!

-Danielel
 
Right on! Seriously though. I personally think that it is messed up to do something to someone that doesnt want anything done to them. If you would get off on that, then would other even worse things may be around the corner? Think about it.
 
I agree

I see nothing at all erotic about a person who doesnt want to be tickled and is being tickled. They fight the laughter, sometimes express pain on their face, and even cry at times.

Just my opinion....
 
Good opinions, but it's apples vs. pears really

This has been debated many times, and always will be I guess: I've certainly said my piece a gazillion times. It just about goes hand in hand with safewords. It's apples vs. pears.

There are other levels that some of you may not realize, may not care to realize, or may realize and not understand. And while your points are more than vaild (under some circumstances) and understandable- that doesn't make it the only way, however- specially if you've been at it a long time and need more creativty and spontaneity. Most people new to the scene want it all very "PC"... some others at it for a long time still never reach for more than the tried and true every detail and safeword pre-planned in advance routine. Still others use it as a simple "ploy" merely to gain a partner, then care little for their needs once tied. There's no way to encompass every type of human being and reaction into one simple answer here because there's always a joker or two in the deck. So let me, if I may, explain the non consensual aspect from at least one who plays both ways- I ask you to consider:

It comes in various forms. I'm sure at some time in your life you tickled some at a beach, a sleepover, the pool, or for some circumstance- and unless you prewarned the person and worked out the details and got their permission first- then it was non consensual.

Not unlike the summertime routine of kids picking up their buddy and tossing them into a pool (no one "asks" for that to happen)- it's chock full of fun, laughter, and spontaneity. Now in this all too "PC" tickling community, if that above same event were to take place- they would first have to ask permission.... agree on the water temp... how high and far to be lifted and carried.. how long in the water... oh, don't get my hair wet!... the safewords.... how wet the water can be... on and on until there is not one single thread of fun or spontaneous thrill left alive within it.

With tickling (or any form of S/M and bondage)- there is a matter of trust. Simply put, if you really trust the person, and you're in this scene willingly, a gathering, or private- and they grab you and tickle you, tie you, whatever- it should be no problem (if they have level heads). After all- you're not there to judge a chile cookout competition. Simpler put: if you don't trust the person that much- there's a good chance that maybe you shouldn't BE where you are!

In regard to another version: tickling a person NOT into this scene, or not aware that after they're tied they will be tickled:
To this version of non consensual- view one of our renfaire tapes and see the audience and victim's response... they get involved, and there is no hatred or anger at all. It's damn hard for ANYONE to pass by a pair of trapped bare feet and NOT live out their secret (if momentary) thought of tickling them- yet all those strangers tickling other strangers w/o their consent and against their will is non consensual! And they know it! The same goes for our beach adventures. A bit less so for the Sorority vids- but they have a goal.

And if you really want to boil it down- how about all those time Mothers and Fathers have tickled their infant's toes and feet in the crib... and the kid has NO voice or say in it?

None of these people know what will happen, nor do they care afterwards- in the case of vids, they sign a release even- it's only us in this community that worry so much. Tickling is given little thought outside our tiny world- very little- just like footcare is. Perhaps because some of us are afraid to be "found out" or feel out of place we worry too much. By now, with the advent of online and TMF and other venues and outlets- you should feel more than at ease though.

Tying up a person and tickling them in a non consensual manner (perhaps they've answered an ad of yours, or you met them at a local B/D S/M club) can be a great deal of fun, and elicit a REAL response (many in this community just fake it well)..... and if you're a good top, you should have no trouble judging when enough is enough- and don't cross the lines. Go to the edge? Sure! Tiptoe over it a tad- maybe, based on the situation. But don't skip over the line. And if you're cringing at that thought- consider this as well: most people into bondage and s/m play and who bottom know and expect that type of play- they enjoy that mystery aspect of it all... they enjoy the "victim role".... in s/m terms, and Palace terms for us, it's called "resistance play". If they weren't looking for a scene of some type- then they just wouldn't be there, and wouldn't be letting you tie them up. It's very real. Safe- but real.

(Please don't confuse my words with the stupid theory some say that when a women gets raped, she's "looking for it"- thats ridiculous and not what this is about, and definitely not what we're about)

It enables you to live out your total fantasy perhaps of a tormentor- or victim- an inquisitioner- and not have to worry so much about your "consensual" actions- just as they did way back when. There were no safewords or consenting playes in the Inquisition as we all know. With that type of play, you can scream out your fears and erotic overtones and not feel guilty because "you now have an excuse to let go" as Freud would say.

Now lets get THIS out of the way: I do not condone rape- forced scenes- passing way over limits on purpose- ignoring safewords used for health conditions of for NEW players- or grabbing right off the streets for tickling against their will- or RAP music being played into the ears of tied victims as torture.

What I say is just to loosen up a bit, and try it. My roller coaster theory still holds true. A roller coaster is non consensual to some degree because once it starts- you usually REALLY want it to stop at some point as the fear rolls in... and safewords on a roller coaster are like giving the passengers control of the brakes... none of that works to make the ride better.

Some of you will always want totally consenting scenes- so that you KNOW that at every moment all you're doing is actually giving pleasure... you may need that.... and that's very cool and more than civilized. It means you're a VERY caring loving partner. We don't have enough of them. If that's enough for you in a scene, more power to you.

But to others (who are hopefully sane, clear thinking adults, with no harm in mind) who seek more- I say, try riding the roller coaster just once.
 
Last edited:
Just my humble opinion:
I realize that there are many sides to this issue and many different ways of looking at it, but the idea of tickling or doing anything else to someone who doesn't want it is to me disturbing. Some people just aren't at all into it and I do not agree with deriving pleasure at someone else's expense. I realize that there are people who enjoy being tickled without first giving their consent, but they are clearly different from someone who does not like it or want it at all. Also, I'm not refering to a quick poke in the ribs either (although this has the potential to become annoying), but rather to more extreme and prolonged tickling. Please consider this along with the other posts in this thread.
 
Of course

Your points are well taken, of course, and I tried to cover that as best I could- but as I said, there is NO way to cover every single human being and their reaction to any given stimuli.... nor are we able to compensate (nor answer FOR) for the disturbed people out there whom you may be referring to.

I've engaged in it tos ome degree as I described, no need repeating- but I could describe many wonderful TRUE LIFE stories here that would excite many for sure (throwing in the pictures to boot)... but in all these times, the results have been wonderful (perhaps because I'm a good top who knows how to get inside your head?)- and I am not disturbed in the slightest. So I wonder where I fall in your category.

Also, I hope you read my post thoroughly and tried to fathom the many points it covers.... oyu may just be one of thse I described that always need ot know it's 100% consenting at all times- and that's cool- but not for everyone. There is no one certain way to put your shoes on, right? Yet, I agree that there are those disturbed ones who'll put their socks on over their shoes too not matter what you tell'em.

To me, when you stated about someone being tickled "against their will"- it sounded like you had a specific experience in mind... and maybe if you give an example of what your definition of non consensual is (with an example, like I did) it would help to let others form their own opinions.
 
Last edited:
After re-reading my post, I definitely feel the need to clarify my response. First of all, Kujman, my post was not directly aimed at you and I apologize if it was taken that way. You have made some excellent points and I was responding to the thread in general rather than your individual post. We are indeed trying to deal with such a large and complex issue that would take volumes to thoroughly cover. I realize that a great deal of the tickling fiction out there features non-consensual tickling. I have no objection to this and enjoy it just as much as anyone else. I do, however, feel the need to separate fantasy from reality. I only object to scenarios in which someone is taken against their will and tickled. You clearly discouraged this as well. Under most circumstances (the complexity of this issue once again manifests itself), I would not consider the tickling of someone who you met at an s/m club, such as your example, to necesarily be non-consensual. Of course, everyone else may have varying opinions on this and the circumstances under which the tickling takes place must be considered. That said, I can't say that I disagree with any of the points you made in your post. I hope this gives a clearer picture of my views and shows that I understand the complexity of this issue. I will be happy to clarify further if anyone is curious.
 
I'm very confused about most of this. I'm sure there are PLENTY of ticklers who dream of tickle torturing their boss, or a neighbor. SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO many ticklees fantasize about BEING tickle TORTURED by strangers AGAINST their will. 50% of tickle fiction that I've read involves tickling where the ticklee is NOT a willing victim. Stories where people with no desire to be tickled end up in a virtual tickle HELL, being tickle tortured for eternity as punishment. We've all read them or enjoyed a few. So are we to say that it's sick for a tickler to invision such? I wholeheartedly disagree.
HOWEVER.......a few weeks ago, someone posted that he has tried tickling women in public that he did not know (tickling feet of women who were crouched low with exposed feet). I can't say I disapprove...after all, it's HIS face to be slapped, not mine. But that doesn't mean I think it's a good idea. Of course it's much safer and prolly even more fun to tickle a consenting victim. But then again, who among us has truly tickle tortured (bondage involved) an UNWILLING victim? Less than .00000000000000001 of even us tickle enthusiasts. Why? Not because of a golden rule of reciprocity. But because A) how can you really get away with tickling a non-consenting victim without repercussion, and B) tickle enthusiasts like tickling that's available. Why struggle with a non-consenting 'lee when you can have someone who'd truly love for you to tickle them until your fingers wear out?

So although ticklers often write and fantasize of tickle torturing the girl who turned them down in high school, or that lady that was rude to you at the DMV, it's just not PRACTICAL for it to actually happen. It will either warrant physical aggression from your victim (bad) or land you in court (worse) or both (worst!). Therefore, the non-consentual tickle torture remains in fiction and fantasy.......and there are no objections to that!

Come on now though people.....don't tell me that if you were invisible for a couple of days, you wouldn't run rampant tickling the cutest people you could find!!!!!! 🙂


Be good, all.
 
I am very thankful to Kujman for posting. The whole reason I started this thread was because I was confused as to what the definition of "non-consensual" might be. All I could picture was someone pinning down some unwilling victim, who really really REALLY didn't want to be tickled. I don't know, I had some crazy image in my head, I guess. To me, the words "non-consensual" have just been ingrained into my head to be along the lines of "rape" or "forced", etc. Just not good connotations.

I just thought of myself. As much as I enjoy being tickled, I hate when random people will come up & grab my ribs, or touch me at all. I am not keen on that, for some odd reason (call me crazy.) Perhaps I should see someone about this, I don't know. But thanks for clearing this up for me. I do try to keep an open-mind, concerning just about anything. Thanks again!!

-Danielle
 
I think Kujman's (and others') core point is that virtually all real tickling happens in an overarching context of trust. Whether it occurs at an s/m club, a Ren-Fair, or at the beach, there is an understanding, clear or implied, that tickling or teasing is within acceptable limits and that no harm will be done.

For example, there is always some "rationale" at a Ren-fair for why the girl in stocks "deserves" to be there and to get tickled. Tickling someone you know at the beach (unexpectedly) happens when a relationship exists between tickler and ticklee; the former has concluded that a quick poke or stroke will be tolerated. (If he judges wrongly, he could get slapped, sworn at, etc.) Tickling a stranger has to be exceptionally rare.

In tickling--as opposed to assault or kidnapping--there is a little mental "contract" that A will playfully "attack" B in a way which feels threatening, but not too much. Exceed the safety zone and both trust and laughter will break down.
 
I'll tackle that.

I don't think it has as much to do with MISERY, so much as tickling is something that is simply intolerable to the ticklish! Even if you LOVE being tickled, you can't help but TRY to escape it (thus the NEED for bonds for those who love being tickled). At the same time, we all know that tickling is 99% harmless (lest you have a medically challenged 'lee). Those wishing to cause true misery might look to inflict PAIN or some other crap. But with tickling, it's something that drives the body and mind into an uneasy state, but unltimately, no harm. It's about putting a person in the ultimate state of ticklishness, whether friend or foe. And the thought of doing that to a boss or someone like that can indeed be nice to some. Just imagine tickling your evil neighbor to teach them a lesson about blowing her leaves in your yard! It's not even about sadism. More of the fascination with tickling as a form that most people usually have a special reaction to!
 
I'll tackle that.

I don't think it has as much to do with MISERY, so much as tickling is something that is simply intolerable to the ticklish! Even if you LOVE being tickled, you can't help but TRY to escape it (thus the NEED for bonds for those who love being tickled). At the same time, we all know that tickling is 99% harmless (lest you have a medically challenged 'lee). Those wishing to cause true misery might look to inflict PAIN or some other crap. But with tickling, it's something that drives the body and mind into an uneasy state, but unltimately, no harm. It's about putting a person in the ultimate state of ticklishness, whether friend or foe. And the thought of doing that to a boss or someone like that can indeed be nice to some. Just imagine tickling your evil neighbor to teach them a lesson about blowing her leaves in your yard! It's not even about sadism. More of the fascination with tickling as a form that most people usually have a special reaction to!
 
What tickling enthusiast at sometime in their life hasn't held down their girlfriend, sister, or whatever and tickled them against their will?
 

Attachments

  • Marianne 1.png
    Marianne 1.png
    1.6 MB · Views: 48
non consensual tickling - where do we draw the line?

After reading all your posts, this is a difficult one for me folks, becuase it has been used abusively on me in the past on more than one occasion. Although I now enjoying being tickled and get great pleasure from it, that was not always the case. I am exceptionally ticklish and am pretty much helpless to do anything to stop the tickler once being tickled, I've completely lost control of the situation. Nowadays the 2 people who tend to tickle me know where to draw the line, but othres in my past haven't. As a kid, I was tickled by a friends father. I never gave consent for this as most kids don't and initially it was nothing more than an adult playfully tickling a kid such as wrestling them to the ground to get a ball and giving a poke in the ribs to get it of them - this guy took things too far and took advantage of my ticklishness for his own sexual eeds. He would tickle me quite innocently to tart with but when tickling my legs would work higher and higher up until he could enter my underwear. He would also tickle me in a swimming pool pinned to the sides and with the wave machine on be able to satisfy himself in me whilst passing it off as tickling fun in a pool, with my screams merely belnding in with the excitement of and fear of others. As an adult I might meet a guy and we'd be on a first or second date etc (I'm not one for sex on a first date) sometimes even several dates in and we might just be sat or lying on the floor chatting when he would start tickling me. Thinking it was just playful I would go along with it initially but even when I then got to stage where I asked them to stop or at times was in tears they didn't and in fact realised that I was so ticklish they could do ANYTHING to me - and that included rape. Some peple don't know when to stop, they don't realise no, means now. They are so lost in their own enjoyment and sexual fulfillment that the person, consent given or not is often forgotten. I have been held down and tickled by 6 guys at a birthday party against my will whilst they masturbated and abused me. I was powerless to do nothing to stop them. The ignored me. Their own fulfillment was all that mattered. Tickling as I have learnt today can be fun, but it is important whether as the tickler or the lticklee and especially when perhaps meeting someone for the first time and getting involved in ticklig with them, that we are all aware of the potential dangers. Thankfully today I can enjoy ticking for what it really is and feel safe with those who tickle me and respect my past experiences and listen to me. I can now enjoy hours of tickling at a time, but it is always even if done by suprise initially, then carried on with my consent and respected if I say No.
 
Whoa. You, my friend, have been abused. Have you talked to anyone professional about it?


I think those instances you gave go far beyond tickling altogether.


For the most part, everyone here can go back to that discussion about the "non-consent" video. I think in this thread, we are all coming up with different forms of consent as far as tickling goes, and that's a problem. We might wanna try this whole thread again later because we're all on different pages.
 
By definiton, any tickling done without a person's consent is non-consensual (hence the "non"). The debate here really isn't about the strict definition of consent and non-consent, but rather is a discussion of the acceptable levels of non-consensual tickling. I'm sorry for sounding so anally PC but some fantasies just shouldn't be acted out. This is my opinion and it is not based or aimed at any of the other opinions given in this post. Just like the "throwing your friend in the pool" analogy most forms of non-consensual tickling are harmless and fun, but there is a line that I would not cross. The most recent posts are a perfect example of this. I realize that a minor was involved in this story, but my feelings would not be much different if it was an adult in the same situation. I also realize that most peoples' views are similar to mine and I'm not trying to sound self-righteous. Non-consensual tickling can definitely be an enjoyable experience but must be used cautiously. Once again, this is only my opinion and is not aimed at anyone.
 
I'm just adding to the detailed description Kujman placed here earlier.

Short and sweet - his deal's still consentual, as his partners are CONSENTING to whatever he'll do. This, having met the man, is likely 'cause he attends to the responses of the bottom/'lee/insert-moniker-for-bound-person-here.

Non-consentual play means, quite literally, that someone is doing something to someone else WITHOUT CONSENT.

Kuj *has consent *. Folks FLY out to play with him. Fly. They volunteer, knowing he plays without safewords. That appeals to 'em. All's well and good, to my way of thinking, as these adults chose their path.

Fantasy is fantasy. There's law against engaging in unwanted physical contact with another person. If you don't get an open invitation to do whatever you see fit, don't do anything. If someone leaps into your stocks, looking impatiently at you to close them up, then go, man, go!

Another perspective, and one of warning, is, as TickleMad illustrated, some folks lose perspective while tickling. They neglect to attend to the partner. Surprising, huh? A sexually-driven act that makes a guy forget everything else. I know you're all shocked. Hah. At gatherings here in California, as well as at other events, there have been issues with some players who don't attend to such. It's dealt with quickly and immediately here. It can lose a host their home, can lead to arrest, and is mean to the person who WANTED such negotiations.

If you don't want negotiations or safewords, ANYONE will play that with you. If you do, you've the right to have them, literally.

dvnc
who still plays with safewords and negotiations, even when the negotiation is "do what you want" and the safeword means I'm not playing with you anymore.
 
What's New
1/12/26
Visit Door 44 for a large selection of tickling clips!

Door 44
Live Camgirls!
Live Camgirls
Streaming Videos
Pic of the Week
Pic of the Week
Congratulations to
*** brad1701 ***
The winner of our weekly Trivia, held every Sunday night at 11PM EST in our Chat Room
Top