Get this ?

[Ivanho22]

Ok so I was talking to my girlfriend one night and she said that she dosen't think i have a tickling fetish at all cuz I don't need it to have sex all the time. I disagree because having a fetish means more of being atracted to a certain pleasure which sort of turns you on, not that you have to get off on it at all. Guess what I mean to say is that tickling turns me on and I use it in sexual activity so I believe that i've had this fetish cuz i've injoyed tickling since I was a kid.
What do you people think?

 

[Crockpot]

Does it really matter what phrase you use to describe it? If it turns you on, it turns you on.

 

[yami]

Well... yeah. If I get tickled, see someone get tickled, I'm immediately turned on. Well, even more so than if I was just going into sex w/o the tickling.

I mean, it's damn more pleasurable and exciting with tickling...

Yeah, I've enjoyed tickling at a young age. I guess it just developed into a fetish as I got older.

Heh... ask your gal what her fetish is... hee hee!

 

[Cbarton]

Depends on the the way you imply the word 'fetish.'

It orignally refered to forms of idol worship, where, if I'm not mistaken the small idol or 'fetish' was set up, and all life revolved around serving the 'fetish.' In modern days, it mostly refers to anything off the 'mainstream' that causes sexual excitement, arousal, or fulfillment and is needed in order for the perosn to reach that state.

 

[cpr1815]

Yea, what kyhawkeye said. Technically maybe it's not a fetish as defined if you do not need to tickle to get aroused or stimulated. Maybe you have a "kink" or just a "thing" for it instead, eh? ;P

 

[conehead180]

Well, I can tell you that, while I can get aroused by it, I don't necessarily need it too get aroused. So you definitely don't "need" a fetish to get you aroused, but you can still have one. But like ky said, it depends on how you define fetish.

 

[George Hull]

As originally defined by psychologists a fetish wasn't a fetish unless (as your girlfriend said) you couldn't get turned on without it. Now I guess it applies to any non-mainstream interest.

A girl I was talking to a while ago said that foot fetishes are so common that you really couldn't consider it a fetish any more, it would be like saying most men have an ass fetish. I think if the same thing happens to the tickling fetish it's not going to so be much fun any more. I'll have to look for something else to satisfy my kinky side.

 

[durandalai1]

What biggeorge has added was something i always wondered,

because things like foot fetishes are so common they are hardly a fetish

if someone asks, i've been in conversations like this, what your fetish is and someone says they have a foot fetish no one cares to much, maybe they thinks it's weird, but when the next person says elbows turn them on, then you have the pot calling the kettle black.

to each his own, i don't think your girlfriend should be concerned what to call it, just do your things and be happy

-Tycho

 

[scorpionldr]

I think psychologists are stuffed full of shit....

and here's why. You're an ANIMAL. YES, as much as we like to proudly walk around talking about how evolved we are to every other life form, we are, in fact, ANIMALS. One of the qualities that we have, being animals, is that sex is sexy. It sounds like something dumb, but honestly, can you say that if you were offered sex, and you gladly obliged (obviously), that in the course of sex that you would not become aroused?!? I think that the definition of a fetish being a turnon that is the ONLY thing that turns you on is a heavy pile of bull, because it tries to state that people that have sex that have a "fetish" can only appear to have one fetish. I don't think it's a possible for a fetish to truly exist according to psychology's definition of it.

 

[Cbarton]

You obviously have not observed or cared for psychiatric patients like I have professionally, or have seen how true fetishes CAN control one. Besides, we are beyond the animal stage. If you believe in evolution, then man is the next step ABOVE them. If you are a creationist or believer in intelligent design, as I am, then Man is way off the scale in comparison to animals. Either way, what arouses you MAY NOT arouse me. And vice versa.

It sounds like something dumb, but honestly, can you say that if you were offered sex, and you gladly obliged (obviously), that in the course of sex that you would not become aroused?!?

Your premise puts the cart before the horse. Is not the arousal required before the sex can occur in most cases? There may be some exceptions (ex. hookers/sex workers for whom it becomes no more than "just another day's work and can become a n emotionless act), but on the whole, if the guys' rod is flaccid, sex ain't happening (assuming your referral to sex is intersourse and not relegated to just a man giving oral sex to a woman). There are some people whose minds are wired such that if you stood (insert prefered male or female sex symbol) in front of them, nothing would happen. But, if you put a perfect representation of the object they have the fetish about front of them (breast, foot, hand, or whatever), then they are more aroused than a fraternity pledge in the midst of his first panty raid.

The cases do exist. The amount of differing styles of porn out there alone are staggering proof of that. Once by mistake, I ended up on a website devoted specitically for guys that got off on hot women driving vehicles stuck or mired in mud and them walking in it trying to get unstuck (can't remember how I got there, looking for parts for my jeep I think and got a bad link, but that's not important). A event that would trigger nothing more than, usually, sympathy to try to get them out of there, but they were SELLING vid clips of this stuff to guys (or gals?) that "got off' on the subject.

Sheesh, just look at the reactions people receive to pics, vid clip and other posts on this site. Do you really need any more evidence???

 

[MistressValerie1]

The term "fetish" has become an adult-video euphemism for what psychologists call a "paraphilia," which is any sexual arousal pattern not focused on orthogenital intercourse. A "fetish," technically, means preferred or exclusive arousal by a non-living object. "Partialism" means preferred or exclusive arousal by a body part not considered sexual in mainstream Western society.

The psychological definitions are heavily based on Freudian psychodynamic theories, legal norms of behaviour, and mainstream religious views about sexuality. Officially, the American Psychological Association considers all paraphilias "abnormal," but many sex researchers recognise that not all alternative arousal patterns are necessarily maladaptive.