Foot Tickling at Water Park

[Headsnap]

This is a tickling forum. A man posts a tickling experience of his and gets a lot of judgemental condemnation for it, and not only from you. He was made to feel like shit for sharing something that he had every business sharing. While you personally didn't resort to namecalling, you nonetheless exaggerated his innocent action into a full-fledged sexual assault, in essence criminalizing him.

Touching people without their consent is assault, matters not whether their reaction is momentary revulsion and nothing more or whether it becomes a full-fledged trial by jury case. Touching people with the goal of eliciting erotic excitement without their consent is indecent assault. His action can therefore not be described as "innocent" simply because in this case the person he touched didn't report it. If you don't like the legal argument then read Bella's post, and if that's still not doing it for you then think how you'd feel if you came here and read that story after your daughter/ sister/ mother/ girlfriend/ wife had come home from working at a water park and told you someone had tickled her foot, or even better try to imagine yourself as the member of staff this kid tickled.

Then you come back and say, "let's treat each other like humans" which carries the inferance that (name removed) "dehumanized " this poor girl with a 1-second tickle.

As far as I'm concerned he did. If you get the idea in your head that people are just there for your amusement and it's okay to touch them in whatever way without so much as talking to them, then those people cease to become human to you; they might as well be slot machines or blow-up dolls. I also don't see much merit to the argument that it's social ticklers rather than sexual ticklers who find this sort of thing okay. I'm a bit of both, in the context of a physical relationship I find tickling my partner arousing, but on the other hand I've been known to tickle the feet of female friends and squeeze the ribs of male friends when playfighting with them, I tickle my nephew and niece when they're rough-housing with me, and I also find that tickling girlfriends in a social way is a good way to break the ice with them and can make them more receptive to more intimate contact such as cuddling and stuff like that. Even after all that I'd still never put my hands on a stranger; the only excuse for that in my mind is self-defence, and since by his own admission this girl wasn't trying to kick him in the face I can't see how he could try and defend himself with that old chestnut.

Funny, based on your reluctance to respond to my last post, I was wondering if perhaps YOU were reconsidering your unforgiving judgmental attitudes in dealing with this topic.

I ignored a few of your posts and others made by people supporting what this kid did because Bella's post and the comment I posted in support of that were far more succinct a response than dissecting them one by one. Now you seem to have taken issue with even the base courtesy of treating others as human beings; or rather you didn't at first, you accused me of dehumanising the kid for what he did, and after I'd explained that chiding someone is hardly dehumanising you start going on about how I've suggested that he dehumanised the girl he tickled by touching her without the slightest inkling of consent, which was inferred by the comment I posted in support of Bella.

 

[BellaRisa]

I feel the need to say a little more here.

I absolutely do not mean to demonize the original poster, nor does anyone else here I believe, despite some rather strong reactions. He sounds like a normal young man who tickled a random foot, he didn't hurt anyone. I totally understand why people are so bothered by the valid yet harsh term 'assault' and the mention of legal consequences, since such are usually reserved for actions that cause more damage. I get that. I think we all do. The thing is, just because something could be more serious doesn't make it right, and definitely doesn't make it something to brag about. Men simply don't have to put up with this issue as much as women do, and so I don't think some of you understand how truly annoying it is.

I'm sure someone will argue, because they have to, but in general women don't go around finding excuses to touch strange men for a quick thrill. I get the impression that some men wish we did 🙄 , but in general it's just not part of womens' behavioral repetoire. Meanwhile, from very early on we females have been dealing with having our bra straps snapped, our rear ends pinched in crowds, our hair touched and even pulled, guys 'accidentally' sliding up against us...it's ridiculous and beyond frustrating. And as I've said, it's nearly always reduced to 'one quick tickle' or whatever, and we're made to feel as though it's not something to be upset about. And for some women, maybe it isn't. But for many of us it is, we do indeed feel assaulted and disrespected when such things occur. And if you don't know the lady in question you don't know if she wants you touching her, now do you? And it's not your place to assume what she wants, or rather what she'll tolerate, based on what you want to do. That's where the respect and self control notions come into play.

I'm sure there are women out there somewhere who like to be touched by random men. Good for them, they're not the ones we're talking about. Just as I'm sure there are people who honestly don't see the huge difference between putting a hand on a stranger's shoulder to ask if you can get by and tickling them. Those are the guys who don't understand why rubbing themselves against you on the bus is a bad thing , I'm not talking to them because they won't understand. No, basically I'm hoping that the intelligent young 'lers reading this will think before becoming yet another annoying-as-hell idiot with roaming hands and no home training, which is what I promise you many women think of guys who behave that way.

Bella

 

[drew70]

In response to Headsnap...

Touching people without their consent is assault, matters not whether their reaction is momentary revulsion and nothing more or whether it becomes a full-fledged trial by jury case.

You are way off, man. Not even close. Here is the dictionary definition of assault:

as·sault
n.
1. A violent physical or verbal attack.

2.

a. A military attack, such as one launched against a fortified area or place.
b. The concluding stage of an attack in which close combat occurs with the enemy.​

3. Law.

a. An unlawful threat or attempt to do bodily injury to another.
b. The act or an instance of unlawfully threatening or attempting to injure another.​

4.

a. Law. Sexual assault.
b. The crime of rape.​

As you can see, simply touching somebody in no way qualifies as an assault of any kind whatsoever.

Touching people with the goal of eliciting erotic excitement without their consent is indecent assault. His action can therefore not be described as "innocent" simply because in this case the person he touched didn't report it.

It's a good thing you aren't a prosecutor. You're assuming intent on the part of the defendant. You have no idea what his goal was other then tickling her foot briefly. Since you haven't adequately established a sexual or indecent motive on his part, his action stands as innocent, until proven otherwise.

If you don't like the legal argument then read Bella's post, and if that's still not doing it for you then think how you'd feel if you came here and read that story after your daughter/ sister/ mother/ girlfriend/ wife had come home from working at a water park and told you someone had tickled her foot, or even better try to imagine yourself as the member of staff this kid tickled.

You've yet to present any valid legal argument for me to like or dislike. If the girl in question was related to me in any of the ways you suggest I imagine, it changes nothing

As far as I'm concerned he did {dehumanize the girl by tickling her}. If you get the idea in your head that people are just there for your amusement and it's okay to touch them in whatever way without so much as talking to them, then those people cease to become human to you; they might as well be slot machines or blow-up dolls.

I disagree with this entire statement. But your opinion is noted.

I also don't see much merit to the argument that it's social ticklers rather than sexual ticklers who find this sort of thing okay. I'm a bit of both, in the context of a physical relationship I find tickling my partner arousing, but on the other hand I've been known to tickle the feet of female friends and squeeze the ribs of male friends when playfighting with them, I tickle my nephew and niece when they're rough-housing with me, and I also find that tickling girlfriends in a social way is a good way to break the ice with them and can make them more receptive to more intimate contact such as cuddling and stuff like that. Even after all that I'd still never put my hands on a stranger; the only excuse for that in my mind is self-defence, and since by his own admission this girl wasn't trying to kick him in the face I can't see how he could try and defend himself with that old chestnut.

He's not defending himself at all. He's done nothing remotely warranting any defense beyond violating your personal code of conduct.

 

[MrPartickler]

I think bella nailed it.

The original poster (or anyone) takes a risk when they touch someone-- anyone--without their consent. And when it's a man touching a woman it's especially risky and perhaps especially insensitive and presumptuous to assume she'll tolerate it or like it. It doesn't mean harm is intended or caused, but intentions can be misinterpreted. After, all, you're a stranger! It could be perceived or interpreted as an accident, flirting, intentional, unwanted sexual contact, etc. Whatever. Name your pleasure. Merely being accused of some of these things enough harm to warrant exercising a little common sense. Hey, it's a risk he was willing to take. I, for one, am not.

Here's a suggestion that might minimize the risk for guys that like to do this: Actually man-up and talk to the woman. Flirt with her if need be and go from there. Who knows...she might actually let you know whether or not an "innocent tickle" is OK. And at the very least it becomes a playful thing between (potential) new friends and not a random "feel" copped by a complete stranger.

The reason/need for all the sneaking around touching and tickling strangers w/o their knowledge and/or consent is just plain creepy anyway, IMO.

 

[Headsnap]

You are way off, man. Not even close. Here is the dictionary definition of assault:

As you can see, simply touching somebody in no way qualifies as an assault of any kind whatsoever.

It's a good thing you aren't a prosecutor. You're assuming intent on the part of the defendant. You have no idea what his goal was other then tickling her foot briefly. Since you haven't adequately established a sexual or indecent motive on his part, his action stands as innocent, until proven otherwise.

You can sit there and quote the Oxford Pocket at me all you want, the fact is that if the girl he tickled was bothered enough by it to want to press charges then assault would be the charge he'd most likely be up on. Don't forget as well, it's considered common assault to spit on someone, or even to drop something in someone's drink. These aren't particularly violent actions, so therefore they'd be common assault rather than assault with intent or assault causing bodily harm (unless you're trying to spike someone's martini so you can rape them or something), but they'd still be assault. If I was able to present this story to a jury, given the language used in the description of the act and the forum upon which it was found, I reckon I'd be able to convince them that not only did contact occur, but also that the contact was motivated desire to elicit erotic excitement through the unsolicited and unexpected tickling of a stranger's foot. I don't need to assume intent on the part of the defendant because the defendant has, in writing this story and posting it on a forum used for the dissemination of tickling fetish material, basically inferred that his intent in tickling this girl was erotic, and I believe the language used in the story is loaded enough to suggest that the defendant did indeed elicit some erotic excitement from the act of touching this woman's foot.

You've yet to present any valid legal argument for me to like or dislike. If the girl in question was related to me in any of the ways you suggest I imagine, it changes nothing

Legal argument above. Don't forget that when you're talking legal arguments, it's more about what you reckon you could prove than anything else, and like I said I reckon I'd have a decent shot at getting indecent assault to stick, whereas common assault is a no-brainer since the defendant has admitted making unsolicited contact with the woman. He didn't injure her so I wouldn't be chasing bodily harm or assault with intent, but the fact is that a common assault was committed when he touched her foot.

I also find it hard to believe that, knowing what you know and reading the story in the context of the forum on which it was posted, you'd be entirely unaffected if she'd been a relative. Like I said this isn't related to the legal argument in any way; I'm talking about a man hearing a female he is close to has been touched by some random kid at work. Maybe it's my upbringing or some classic male conditioning or whatever, but it'd most definitely piss me off if I found out some kid had been fiddling with my other half's feet while she's at work, moreso if it was a blood relative.

I disagree with this entire statement. But your opinion is noted.

Is it really so wrong to expect people to show a little restraint? I don't think so, and I find it quite difficult to fathom how any rational human being could possibly take issue with it. I dunno, maybe I've just lived a sheltered life, what with keeping my hands to myself and not randomly going around touching people and stuff. Perhaps I'm not normal after all. Perhaps I should be rubbing myself up against more women or something. I mean let's face it my hand would only be brushing against her leg for a second, it's not going to leave a mark and if it creeps her out then so what? Her feelings aren't my problem, I got mine 😀. Thank you drew, your vehement defence of random touching of strangers has opened my eyes! 🙄

He's not defending himself at all. He's done nothing remotely warranting any defense beyond violating your personal code of conduct.

I didn't say he was defending himself. He's obviously not because I haven't seen hide nor hair of him since the thread started going a bit sour. What I'm saying is that in my opinion, which is one I'm confident a lot of people share, the only time you put your hands on a stranger is if they are physically attacking you thus forcing you to DEFEND YOURSELF or have consciously and clearly invited the contact. I was making the point that there didn't seem to be much to suggest either in his story, so it would be difficult to extricate himself by claiming such was the case.

 

[drew70]

In response to Headsnap

You can sit there and quote the Oxford Pocket at me all you want, the fact is that if the girl he tickled was bothered enough by it to want to press charges then assault would be the charge he'd most likely be up on.

That's quite a different statement from "Touching someone without their consent is assault," which is that to which I was responding. I merely pointed out the obvious fallacy in it. The girl obviously DIDN'T want to press charges, so the rest of your statement is all meaningless hypothetical allegory.

If I was able to present this story to a jury, given the language used in the description of the act and the forum upon which it was found, I reckon I'd be able to convince them that not only did contact occur, but also that the contact was motivated desire to elicit erotic excitement through the unsolicited and unexpected tickling of a stranger's foot.

The only thing you'd be "wreckin" are any chances at a legal career by attempting to prosecute such a frivolous case. I can assure you the only thing you've convinced me of is your venom and vitriol with regards to an innocent if uninvited tickle. You're not even making a mountain out of a mole hill. You're making a mountain out of a molecule.

I don't need to assume intent on the part of the defendant because the defendant has, in writing this story and posting it on a forum used for the dissemination of tickling fetish material, basically inferred that his intent in tickling this girl was erotic, and I believe the language used in the story is loaded enough to suggest that the defendant did indeed elicit some erotic excitement from the act of touching this woman's foot.

LOL. So, in prosecuting this "crime" of a 1-second tickle of an already barefoot girl in a water park, you're going to use the TMF as proof that his intentions were erotic. God, this is priceless. Assuming this "case" was even investigated at all, which is already stretching realism pretty thin, how would the investigator even know to LOOK at the TMF? Assuming by some miracle he does find the TMF and this absurd thread, Skullduggery's description has already been deleted. And even if the original post had remained intact, do you honestly believe Skullduggery is using his real name? Now the "investigation team" has to go through the process of proving that the entity who posted this is the same man his "swat team" apprehended at the water park. Then, after all that is miraculously accomplished, you now have the considerable task of proving that by posting the incident in a Forum that is about Tickling, both sexual AND non-sexual, it establishes erotic intent beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Again, good luck!

I also find it hard to believe that, knowing what you know and reading the story in the context of the forum on which it was posted, you'd be entirely unaffected if she'd been a relative. Like I said this isn't related to the legal argument in any way; I'm talking about a man hearing a female he is close to has been touched by some random kid at work. Maybe it's my upbringing or some classic male conditioning or whatever, but it'd most definitely piss me off if I found out some kid had been fiddling with my other half's feet while she's at work, moreso if it was a blood relative.

The reason why you find it hard to believe is due to your own narrow view. Like many, you associate tickling with eroticism. Because you do, tickling seems inherently erotic to you, and you have difficulty reconciling the concept of others not seeing it this way. If my daughter or little sister came home from the pool and mentioned that some guy tickled her foot for a second or so before sliding down the water boggen, I wouldn't think anything of it. You on the other hand see it as no different than walking up to a stranger, pinning her down and tickling her intensely. You've lost all abjectivity in your bloodlust and outrage. I have to tell you, it is most amusing.

Is it really so wrong to expect people to show a little restraint? I don't think so, and I find it quite difficult to fathom how any rational human being could possibly take issue with it. I dunno, maybe I've just lived a sheltered life, what with keeping my hands to myself and not randomly going around touching people and stuff. Perhaps I'm not normal after all. Perhaps I should be rubbing myself up against more women or something. I mean let's face it my hand would only be brushing against her leg for a second, it's not going to leave a mark and if it creeps her out then so what? Her feelings aren't my problem, I got mine 😀. Thank you drew, your vehement defence of random touching of strangers has opened my eyes! 🙄

Again, you've lost your grip on what's being challenged. I don't defend the wanton tickling of strangers. I do show restraint and it isn't that difficult. I don't thing I've ever tickled a stranger in my lifetime. Let's be clear about exactly what I'm defending which is THIS particular instance only.

 

[dontforget]

LOL this topic is sad. Ok first of all the poor guy was saying sorry. I have never seen someone say sorry and get laid into like this. Am I taking his side? no im not. No it not is the legal definition of assault as drew said. . but Yes it is a form of mental pleasure for us. I can say in hounosty I have never tickled a stranger but who here can say they never sat on a bus and at least thought of it? And I see alot of people saying they also have never done it. Far from it for me to call them liers but tickling a foot hm this is a good debate. Sure youll get all defensive
and again not calling anyone a lier but im saying id lie to if I saw this post and saw a man saying sorry, saying he removed it asking for an appology and getting smashed on. Now sure maybe he should appologize to the poor woman but he cant. Best hope is to control himself. But ask your self a few questions before you judge so harshly. Like for example have you never done anything illigal? Is tickling a stranger the only crime in the world? no how many of you have ever been in a fist to fist? I have. How many of you have smoked a joint or drank under age? or even crossed on a red light? Exactly.
Not taking sides with him because I agree he wasent being mature or responsible at the time. But how many of you sat there and read the whole storY? Did you read one line and go ew this is evil and wrong or did you finish the whole thing? FP has sold many non consentual tickling videos also. Sombody bought them. Its a fantasy. I share it. how many of you share it. Please look in the mirror. Yes he did go out and do it whitch is absolutly disgusting but Nobodys perfect. I bet somtimes everyone at least wishes they could release thier inner most temtations. In closing id like to say to him what you did WAS wrong. theres no other ......eh THATS THE BOTTOM LINE !but I at least appreciate your appology and hope you can learn from the utter dissrespect you got from the community.
Jesus says to respect one another and pass judgment only if you be judged. IS anyone really 100% innocent.? Im not I havent ever tickled a complete stanger but im not. Thanks for listining as got this off my chest. I do appreciat a place like this where I can state my opinion.

P.S someone said its people like him that make people like us get called freaks or somthing like that? ok I took offense to that.did anyone else? I think we are all equals in this world no matter our bank funds and houses and perfect or not so perfect lives. Please dont say that like I mean some of us are shy. Me for example and I dont think calling anyone a freak is right. You could seriously down the guy . If somone called me a freak because I like to tickle woman id be very depressed about it. Some people arent open minded enough to understand us at all in the slightest but thats ok. People are what they are.

 

[ViperGTS]

GR violation.

 

[tickleking]

I still haven't seen the original post, as I have been out all week. Given all the discussion surrounding it, I would pay good money to read it, as it must have really been a great one second foot tickle...

Regards,

TK

 

[drew70]

P.S someone said its people like him that make people like us get called freaks or somthing like that? ok I took offense to that.did anyone else?

Not offense, exactly. I did regard it as rather silly. What makes people like us get called freaks in my opinion is when we insist on ascribing a sexual context to every happenstance of tickling whatsoever. Yes there is sexual tickling, and there is fetish tickling, I don't deny any of that. But there is also platonic, playful tickling. Now since Skullduggery didn't say whether his experience was sexual to him or not, I think it's only reasonable to give him the benefit of the doubt. I prefer not to assume guilt, but rather have it clearly established.


edited to remove a quoted GR violation. Please don't quote violations report them.

 

[dontforget]

. Belive me I think we have all made abit more than a few typos in this topic LOL. I bet it wasent ment to sound like that. Ive said a few things myself out of bickering and childish imaturity on a few TMF topics but have always appologized for it. Somtimes these issues get a little sensitive to people.
I do feel that since he was posting it in the TMF that the experiance was rather sexual . god bless

DF.

 

[drew70]

I do feel that since he was posting it in the TMF that the experiance was rather sexual . god bless

DF.

May I ask on what you base this? I only ask because it seems to me that to assume that posting such an experience on the TMF is an indication of eroticism would seem to infer that you believe all posts of tickling here on the TMF are based on eroticism. I would of course respectfully disagree. god bless you too!

 

[ViperGTS]

GR violation.

 

[venray]

Best to err on the side of caution and not give in to impulses...impulsive folks make the papers and newscasts and make the fetish world look like a bunch of pervs and freaks....We do not need that kind of bad publicity.....


R

No one said anything about him making us look like freaks...let's clarify...

Impulsive people getting caught or prosecuted because they cant keep their hands off DO indeed make the fetish world look like pervs and freaks....

I believe folks should read before they misquote....and if offense was taken then perhaps it was not without reason......

 

[Headsnap]

I'm ducking out of this now, if anyone wants to know my opinions on the matter they've been posted at least four times in the backpages of this thread; once initially and a few more times with annotation to try and explain to drew why it's not wrong to expect people not to touch strangers and how it can, and indeed would, have pretty serious consequences if it were reported. In the immortal words of Michael Blount; Bye! Thanks for.... stopping by!!!


~edited for quoting a GR violation. Please don't do that. Report them.

 

[venray]

As you can see, simply touching somebody in no way qualifies as an assault of any kind whatsoever. [/color]

Maybe according to Webster, but legally in the US it is defined as follows:

"Assault is a crime of violence against another person. In some jurisdictions, assault is used to refer to the actual violence, while in other jurisdictions (e.g. some in the United States, England and Wales), assault refers only to the threat of violence, while the actual violence is battery. Simple assaults do not involve deadly weapons; aggravated assaults often do.

Assault is often defined to include not only violence, but any physical contact with another person without their consent. "


If it is done for sexual gratification of any kind it becomes sexual assault.....

 

[dontforget]

May I ask on what you base this? I only ask because it seems to me that to assume that posting such an experience on the TMF is an indication of eroticism would seem to infer that you believe all posts of tickling here on the TMF are based on eroticism. I would of course respectfully disagree. god bless you too!

Yoyre right of course. again just my opinion. I feel more people that have sexual tickling experiences visit the TMF than ones that dont thats all. Also I dident read the stroy so I have no idea if he sounded proud, turned on,or w/e about the experience. perhaps he is the only one that can answer that.

And Ven I agree with that because I stated before in my first replay to this topic that he did touch a random stranger in a manner than pleases him sexualy. Again that is just a guess. But I think it would be a very slim chance that he does NOT have a tickling or foot or both fetish.

 

[tickleking]

Assault is often defined to include not only violence, but any physical contact with another person without their consent.

If it is done for sexual gratification of any kind it becomes sexual assault.....

My guess is this is not a true legal definition, as it looks like it came from wikipedia.com or experts.com 😉

At any rate, the most something like this could even conceivably be prosecutable is fourth or fifth degree (misdemeanor) sexual assault, and IIRC, in most jurisdictions that requires contact with "intimate" body parts. As a result, I would think even an activist judge would have a hard time defining that as dragging a finger up the foot of someone at water park.

Regards,

TK

 

[Sunjob]

The guy said he's sorry and I doubt he'll ever tickle anybody ever again without getting their full written consent in a legal contract. What he did was wrong and he realises that now.

I see many arguments from people that as he posted on a tickling fetish forum then clearly he must have got sexual pleasure from this. This directly contradicts what I previously read in another thread where MANY people said that they don't find ALL tickling sexual. Could it be that this was one of those playful and non-sexual instances rather than a moment of perverse sexual lust, which several people seem to make it seem like?

 

[drew70]

Assault is often defined to include not only violence, but any physical contact with another person without their consent. "


If it is done for sexual gratification of any kind it becomes sexual assault.....

Excellent reference, Ray. I find the phrase "often defined" a little currious. It begs the question, "How often?" It seems to imply that it is just as often NOT defined by mere physical contact. The dictionary definition I quoted did include a couple of legal definitions, neither of which came close to defining assault as "any physical contact with another person without their consent." I would say that even given that assault is sometimes defined in a legal sense as any physical contact with another person without their consent, I doubt that something as brief as Skullduggery's foot tickle would be enough to constitute legal assault, and certainly not sexual assault. Otherwise people would be "assaulting" each other regularly on city streets, crowded stores, busses and theme parks.

 

[venray]

My guess is this is not a true legal definition, as it looks like it came from wikipedia.com or experts.com 😉

At any rate, the most something like this could even conceivably be prosecutable is fourth or fifth degree (misdemeanor) sexual assault, and IIRC, in most jurisdictions that requires contact with "intimate" body parts. As a result, I would think even an activist judge would have a hard time defining that as dragging a finger up the foot of someone at water park.

Regards,

TK

I suggest you google search state of (insert your state here) assault laws and MY guess is it will open your eyes a bit....

 

[pips33pips]

what happened?

Don't mean to sound dumb, but I actually missed the original story on this subject...What happened?

I'm guessing that an attendant at a water park got tickled by one of the members of our community...I was just curious as to how it all came about.

Can anyone enlighten me?

Thanks,

Pips

 

[Barlow]

Don't mean to sound dumb, but I actually missed the original story on this subject...What happened?

I'm guessing that an attendant at a water park got tickled by one of the members of our community...I was just curious as to how it all came about.

Can anyone enlighten me?

Thanks,

Pips

The original poster was preparing to use a water slide and a young female water park employee was holding his board with her foot until he could begin his descent. He gave her foot a tickle, she seemed a little miffed, and she sent him down the slide.

Barlow

 

[jaba]

grab the pitchforks!.....

The original poster was preparing to use a water slide and a young female water park employee was holding his board with her foot until he could begin his descent. He gave her foot a tickle, she seemed a little miffed, and she sent him down the slide.

Barlow

You mean THAT was the occurrence that started this "thermonuclear chain reaction" of a discussion?

I remember reading his original post, and thinking, "man, this kid is gonna get "incinerated alive" by some of the members on this forum for that story"......

but I had no idea that the mushroom cloud from his ashes would still be billowing in the air of the TMF to this day.......

 

[venray]

Most of the "mushroom cloud" has nothing to do with the original post....

The "debate" here has become one of the legalities and ethics (or lack there of) when touching a stranger without permission....

Many seem to think it is ok to give an innocent poke or tickle.....others do not think it is ok....

Simplified bit most discussions are.......