If this isn't a fetish, then why are some of us 'hard-wired'?

[BellaRisa]

I think we are born with certain things that can be triggered by environment which may be why certain children grow into adults with tickling fetishes and others don't.

Ok...that thing we're born with can be triggered? That's what I'm talking about. If we're all born with that trigger, why are some folks' trigger never tripped even though our environments are mostly the same? And if only some of us have that trigger, then that's the "thing we're born with" that differentiates us from non-fetishists.

 

[chicago]

Ok...that thing we're born with can be triggered? That's what I'm talking about. If we're all born with that trigger, why are some folks' trigger never tripped even though our environments are mostly the same? And if only some of us have that trigger, then that's the "thing we're born with" that differentiates us from non-fetishists.

Yeah, the latter is what I was kinda talking about, but I was thinking the trigger is not tickle-fetish specific, just deviant in general.

Am I making sense at all? lol

 

[Deleted member 66627]

Do you consider a "fetish" something that someone is necessarily born with? I'm certain that I have some seemingly-inescapable sexual interests that I acquired at specific times during my life...

No, not necessarily. I consider everyone here a fetishist. It's what we sought out, isn't it?

 

[BellaRisa]

Yeah, the latter is what I was kinda talking about, but I was thinking the trigger is not tickle-fetish specific, just deviant in general.

Am I making sense at all? lol

Yup, that does make sense 🙂 I think it really is kink-specific though, because like I'm saying in the little thread I started I just don't think toddlers/preschoolers have had enough time, nor do they have sufficient imprinting capablilty, to be shaped by environment to show traits of one kink or another that early, yet many of us knew we were into this (or spanking or whatever) on some level before we were four years old. It's kinda like the foot lovers who think their kink began because they saw their mom's feet all the time while they were crawling around. Ok...but that's darn near every baby on the planet, yet only some of them develop a foot fetish. I believe there's something genetic that makes those babies notice feet more, that's all

 

[Sandrock74]

Face facts people...we all have the mutant gene for tickling.

 

[dvnc]

I dig what AnnieHall's saying, but it wasn't true for me. I had this focus, this interest, LONG before school age. I've early memories of being completely fascinated with tickling at 2. Again with memories at 5, with several other kids playing the same silly tickling games. It wasn't sexual. It wasn't deviant. It was a child playing in that way children get when they've a fascination with something.

Some kids had a favorite toy. I had no inanimate objects I favored. I just liked tickling amongst the other kinds of social play I knew.

I liked playing in the mud, too. Thankfully, that didn't turn into this sexual focus.

I believe the potential was always there, and when nurtured, became stronger.

 

[chicago]

Causes of Fetishism Not Understood
The causes of fetishism are not clearly understood. Some learning theorists believe that it develops from early childhood experiences, in which an object was associated with a particularly powerful form of sexual arousal or gratification.

Other learning theorists would not focus on early childhood, but on later childhood and adolescence and the conditioning associated with masturbation activity. Psychoanalytical theories of causality focus on concepts of penis worship and castration anxiety. Researchers have shown that in general fetishists have poorly developed social skills, are quite isolated in their lives and have a diminished capacity for establishing intimacy.

The last bit there obviously doesn't apply to everyone and this piece here found at http://health.discovery.com/centers/sex/sexpedia/fetishism_02.html only covers fetishes. I would guess the theories for how philias and perversions get started is similar, but couldn't find anything on the net about them.

 

[dvnc]

A search on "DSM-IV" and "Paraphilia" gets you a world of info on them.

Keep in mind, folks, that MOST paraphilias don't have a positive definition, and we're lumped in with the destructive and unsanitary types. I recall that this squicks some.

Paraphilia is a general term for such things, as is fetish. One can have a fetish for poo, after all, or for flowers. Most don't sweat a flower fetish. It's very conditional.

 

[Vae]

I know it's an age-old debate. But thinking more about it, it just doesn't seem possible for me at least to categorize it as just an interest. I was into this way before I even knew what "it" was. I can't say the same about writing or reading books.

I have a heavy interest in reading, writing and even baking. I wasn't born with it though.

So, it's just got to be a fetish..


..right??

A couple of things qualify a fetish.

In the strictest of terms, a fetish needs an object some sort to be available to be brought to orgasm. It can something simple, like squeezing an ass or shoes.

Tickling is an action and reaction. It's not an object. Because of that, I've heard it defined as a "deviancy." It effectively is the same thing, but is defined for actions. Cutting or other pain inducing activities could go into deviancies.

So I define tickling as a deviancy for those who need it to orgasm. While I prefer tickling in my sexual activities, I do not need it to orgasm. So for me, it's just a deep interest. But when I tell people about it, I usually include the word 'fetish' because no one cares about technicalities. 🙂

 

[wishfoot88]

i usually use the term fetish as those who i have told, will trick me into saying that anyway.

if i was to say "i like tickling" they would start saying things like "in a sexual way?" or "i bet it turns you on!" which are true, but i don't need the negativity to be in place.

i suppose for me it is my "X" factor.

it goes into my formula for happiness.

X+Y+Z+A+B=H

where;

X=tickling, and everything related

Y=family and friends

Z=comfort

A=success

B=hobbies

H=happiness

but that is the way that i see it.
i feel that i cannot be happy without it.
but i could be happy without stuff like, cooking, walking the dog.
stuff that i like doing, but is not something i absolutely, unconditionally love.

hope that's the kind of reply you were hoping for🙂

 

[Raytheon]

@wishfoot88 that is an awesome post dude

I think it changes from person to person and how into tickling they are. For example i have a sexual interest in tickling. If i get tickled, under the right conditions, ill get turned on. That for me is my fetish. On the flip side of the coin another like is bootylicious girls covered in babyoil taking advantage of me. I like it enough to seek it out but i dont follow it. For me thats an interest. I have interests in other things too but tickling will always be my passion.

When it comes to 'hard-wiring' i believe its psychological. I was never happy as a kid with harsh controlling folks and a blessed brother it was a hard upbringing. Tickling was the happy escape, the naughty release and the huge smiles and fun all at the same time. It made me happy when everything else was down. Tickling went on to play an important part of my life and helped shape me into who i am today.

*woah life story alert!* sorry lol

Anyways what i ment to say was i believe my life and what was going on in it led me to tickling. The same way, for example, as a person always in control likes being taken advantage of or the quiet librarian likes to dominate. Also i believe the internet has played a huge part in opening peoples eyes to whats out there and making that important first discovery that 'your not the only one'...

 

[Gamer]

[essay warning]There is little doubt that amongst the genetic variation of the human population that some have factors in their genome that lead to more favorable perceptions to certain stimuli than others thus leading to an increased interest with a relatively small number of cases resulting in the full-blown fetish that pyschologists usually define.

Almost everybody, though, has a fetish (something that gets them aroused that is not the vagina or penis). Most have the 'boob' fetish as it is prominently deemed the point of sexual focus in most human societies today. Just note the existance of the bra, and if you think about, the breasts are not even involved in the actual action of intercourse and they only play a role (9 months later) with the result of successful intercourse (eg offspring).

In all probability, humans (and most likely other animals as well) have a pre-desposition to find other things sexually arousing to improve the interest in intercourse beyond that of the 'sexual high.' The breast fetish is the easiest to pick up due to the culture we live in today.[/essay]

Yeah, so...those are my thoughts on the matter....if you disagree, thats okay, just don't pie me

 

[LD_Tickler]

Just to sidle on in here...

I really don't like the "hardwired" theory. I don't believe for a second anyone is born with a particular fetish. With the power of psychological forces (such as association) being constantly reaffirmed, it just makes so much more sense to think that fetishes and deviances are subconsciously developed through experience.

If fetishes were genetic, they would be truly random and have nothing to do with common experience. You could get turned on by light. You could get turned on by cool breezes.

But so many fetishes can be analyzed for their underlying social implications. Spanking is an obvious example. Is it not more reasonable to imagine they're socially developed?

As for the comparison between fetishes and homo/heterosexuality... I'm not sure it holds. Attraction to the same sex is so common and is so general that I don't think it can count as a "deviance" on the same level as tickling. After all, even within tickling, homo/heterosexuality comes into play more often than not. I'm a ticklephile, AND heterosexual. I'm a ticklephile within the context of being attracted to girls. I don't think they're the same category, so I see no problem considering fetishes to be socially developed but general sexual orientation a matter of birth.

Besides, some studies have shown that homosexuals often have part of their brain (hypothalmus... or something?) shaped differently than heterosexuals, which points to a biological, rather than social, determinant.

Sorry if this is derailing the main topic. Feel free to ignore me. 😀

Well, I guess I'll be hitting the ol' dusty trail...