This is primarily for the males here. If the situation is so convoluted and frought with moral nuances, how do any of us manage to tickle a girl's feet?
Derp? We either ask, or we sense that it would be okay based on our appraisal of the situation and/or our relationship with the girl in question.
Do we ask them to read and sign a legal statement as an act of disclosure?
Reducto ad absurdum. This is not what anyone is implying, and you know it.
I'll wager that everyone here has tickled some girl's feet and felt aroused by it. Are we then to confess and apologize?
No. Any woman with half a brain in her head can generally tell when a man is aroused. Most women
also assume that if a guy is trying to touch them, it's because he's trying to
get aroused. Or, at least, raise the level of intimacy beyond that of formality. For example, you shake hands with your boss, you don't hug them. You
do hug your friends, however, and if someone whom you've ever only shaken hands with suddenly tries to hug you, it's not that much of a stretch to assume that they're raising the level of intimacy between you from "cool acquaintance" to "vaguely warm and familiar".
You also don't apologize for your arousal. Only a spineless pussy is ashamed of his wants and needs.
HOWEVER, one of the foremost things that creeps women out is a man trying to hide his desires from her. Sneakiness and furtiveness is creepy, and if you act all innocent and then do something that pops a boner, and she notices, she's going to wonder why you're hiding behind a veneer of "oh no, nothing wrong here!" rather than just going for it so she can either approve or disapprove of the contact.
As I've said before, the
only reason to do that is because you want to circumvent her ability to consent, because you're afraid that she will not - and nine times out of ten, you'll be right, because you didn't read the situation correctly.
Have any of you spontaneously put a girl's feet in your lap and started tickling them? Did you get a sexual rush? If yes, then some here feel that you committed a crime against the unknowing victim. If the situation is so morally repugnant to some then they should do their best to avoid all foot contact, because it may stir up evil and insidious desires.
Sorry, but again, this is a load of horseshit and not what anyone has actually said.
What they
have said is that you should be up front about your intentions, without being crudely blunt... but
also that subterfuge intended to circumvent consent is wrong. And there's no argument you can put forth that will convince anyone with a shred of sense and/or decency that lying to someone in order to trick them into consenting to something they normally wouldn't is right in any way, shape, or form.
No, you don't have to hide your boner, nor do you have to make them sign a consent form in triplicate. You simply go for it, or ask - and if they let you, great. If they don't, then you respect that.
BUT... context is everything.
How is that different from what the contest winner did? Context, context, context. Winning a contest is not a socially appropriate opportunity to proposition someone for a sexual encounter. Taking them on a date, is.
This whole situation is mind boggling. We don't even know if the guy had a sexual thing for tickling feet.
Tell you what; you go out and find me ONE person who would suggest tickling feet instead of going to dinner with someone who DOESN'T have a tickling fetish and I'll eat my hat. Those of us with any experience with both this community and the real world know that tickling simply doesn't leap to most people's minds like this
unless they have a fetish; especially since the dolts in this community are constantly trying to trick celebrities into participating in mainstream tickling opportunities so that they can post them here so we can all have a good wank - primarily by masking them as harmless, "just for fun" activities so that the target won't get creeped out.
The chance that the guy in question didn't have a tickling fetish are retardedly small. Is it possible? Yeah, just like it's possible that Orianthi Panagaris may actually show up on my doorstep one day and confess that she's loved me from afar ever since the day she accidentally found that YouTube video of me playing my guitar.
He didn't try to sneak around about it, most likely because he saw nothing wrong with it.
Technically, there wasn't anything earth-shakingly wrong with it, and depending on how he worded it, it was probably fine. It was in slightly poor taste, because as I've said it was out of context, but ultimately it was up to the DJ herself to decide if it was appropriate or not. The fact that she was considering it implies that she didn't.
However, the people who're saying it's wrong are commenting on the context - in general, you shouldn't ask random strangers for sexual favors, or at least if you are, then the least creepy thing you can do is to be up-front about it.
You do realize that some folks find foot tickling fun and not sexual at all do you not?
Sure, but the odds of them doing something like this are, again, retardedly small. The conduct of this community proves it so.
In re-reading these comments my mind has been re-blown. One more thing, she didn't appear to be disturbed at all by her co-worker who confessed that he had a foot fetish. The thing that was foreign to her was that it could be sexual and that is due to her lack of experience. Lots of odd things get people off. She would really be freaked out by someone with a hand fetish. By the way, what are these people to do? Refrain from shaking hands with anyone for fear that they may get a little aroused and then feel guilty because they got aroused in an illicit way?
You don't know whether or not she was freaked out by her coworker - but again, context. She would be less freaked out by someone she
knew confessing such because there is much less of an implied uncertainty. Women have a very heightened sense of 'stranger danger'. You may not like it, but that's the world we live in.
Your 'hand fetish' example is false equivalence. Shaking hands is not something out of the ordinary that is mostly engaged in by hand fetishists. A more equivalent scenario would be if a hand fetishist tricked people into thinking they had something on their fingers and then licked it off, or took furtive photos of their hands and posted them on the Hand Fetish Media Forum for all their finger-buddies to wank over. And even if it
was the same thing, you may very well be surprised to find out that most women will forbid someone from touching them in the exact same way that someone else is allowed to, solely because of the implied context behind the touch. Arguing that said women are not allowed to have this filtering process is a a road you don't want to go down, because you'll just be supporting the post I made in another thread that states that people like that are just too pussified to actually be rapists. It's the same concept.
Foot tickling, on the other hand, is far more potentially intimate, even for normal folks. And anyway, like I said, the fact that it might be sexual may not have bothered her; I've known plenty of women who didn't care if I was getting off on touching their feet even if they weren't... but the thing is, they
knew, and decided that it was okay. The arousal is not the problem - the problem is tricking people into thinking you're not getting aroused.
I still say that this whole thing is a subconscious manifestation of self-loathing due to guilt over their fetish. They secretly feel that it is wrong and a situation like this brings out all of their hidden boogums in regard to it. Folks like this should do everything that they can to purge themselves of this unspeakable evil that stirs up forbidden lusts in regard to the unsuspecting.
Bluntly? You're wrong.
Regards,
Phin
