Is tickling cheating?

[coldneck]

if it's done right, then hell yes it's cheating! lol

steve

I wish there was a "like" button on here!

 

[coldneck]

What really counts is what your SO thinks, because if they consider what you do cheating, they are the ones to decide the consequences.

I couldn't disagree more.

If you're going to live your life at the mercy of your SO's ever-fluctuating opinion, it's going to be an egg-shell laden road.

Arriving at a somewhat "mutual decision" on where your boundaries lie has always worked best for me.

But then again, I don't like to be dictated to, and the controlling types never last long with me. Life is too short to have to answer to someone at home.
I have to do that at work for most of my waking hours. My SO doesn't pay very well, so I choose not to be dictated to.

 

[coldneck]

I think if you do anything that you are consciously aware would hurt your 'other's' feelings and trust, is flat out cheating. If the concept of "sneaking' or 'omission of facts' plays a role in you activities... its cheating. However, if your 'other' doesn't give a weasel fuck's shit in hell what you do, or you don't give a weasel fuck about your other nor your relationship... then you are only cheating yourself.

Soooo Preachy. LOL!

Reminds me of my Jr High Algebra teacher' favorite quote: "If you look at your neighbor's paper for the answer, it's cheating!
You might get a better grade, but the only person you're cheating ... is yourself [shakes head, wags finger].

Using your own moral compass is a great idea.

Allowing others to approve your settings ... not so great.

 

[C.A.B.]

Soooo Preachy. LOL!

Reminds me of my Jr High Algebra teacher' favorite quote: "If you look at your neighbor's paper for the answer, it's cheating!
You might get a better grade, but the only person you're cheating ... is yourself [shakes head, wags finger].

Using your own moral compass is a great idea.

Allowing others to approve your settings ... not so great.

Go back your jar of Vaseline in your mother's basement, Troll.

 

[coldneck]

Go back your jar of Vaseline in your mother's basement, Troll.

LOL. The last resort of the humiliated. The name calling.

Hey buddy, didn't you mean to say "Go back TO your jar of Vaseline?" You really should bone up on your grammar. You're only cheating yourself! [wags finger]

 

[Mitchell]

One thing I was thinking about in regard to this topic:

The opening title: "Is tickling cheating", is actually ambiguous, for this reason.

"Tickling", can just refer to a playful tickle between friends. If this is true, then both myself, and several other girls I've known in my life, have cheated, because.. many of the girls I've tickled, as well as myself, were involved with other people when either I tickled them, or they tickled me. When I say "Tickled", I'm referring to playful tickles of the feet, and other parts of the body, that happened quickly, and were not sexual in nature.

The kind of tickling asked about in the actual post of "Arranging tickle sessions to be tied, or to tie up, someone other than your partner without your partner's knowledge" is, to me, cheating, because again the people involved are engaging in an activity that turns them on, without their partner knowing, and it is no different then kissing another person, or a person with a foot fetish, worshipping another person's feet other than their partner's

 

[coldneck]

"Tickling", can just refer to a playful tickle between friends.
When I say "Tickled", I'm referring to playful tickles of the feet, and other parts of the body, that happened quickly, and were not sexual in nature.

The kind of tickling asked about in the actual post of "Arranging tickle sessions to be tied, or to tie up, someone other than your partner without your partner's knowledge" is, to me, cheating, because again the people involved are engaging in an activity that turns them on.

This post is the definition of contradiction, like so many others here.

A "playful / quick tickle" is the same as a full-blown tickle session if the ACT of tickling arouses you? Right?

Does it matter if it's 1 stroke (harmless) or 100 (lethal)?

Isn't the arousal affect the same?

The only difference is the "length I'm subjecting my innocent victim to my fetish METER".

You still get your jollies, and get to "find out", and go home with some spank bank material, right?

All of this "one little tickle is OK...prolonged is NOT" is a full-boatload of horseshit.

To borrow an axiom from the the non-con crowd: "A little RAPE is OK ... just not a LOT!"

See the irony?

 

[PiperGK1]

To: HyperTicklish

"Whilst?"

🙂

I see you are not above throwing a little antiquated verbiage into the fray. In spite of the fact that what you said came off as a little pretentious, I suppose I do agree with you in theory. In practice, however, life is not as linear as the common morality has led us to believe.

I don't mean that a loving relationship between a man and a woman should be cavalier; on the contrary, if a marriage or a partnership is strong, it certainly deserves respect. However, we all have desires, and if those desires are supposed to be stifled just for the sake of making the other person feel comfortable, then we both lose, because neither of us is being honest.

However, if the bonds of a relationship are strong enough that each person can explore their own sexuality, then I believe the relationship grows stronger and closer for the sharing, and the giving.

If your husband/wife/partner deeply craves mint chocolate chip ice cream, and you hate mint chocolate chip ice cream, which is better: that they deny themselves the taste for the rest of their lives in honor of their love for you, or that you allow them to have it in honor of your love for them?

 

[rhiannon]

your husband/wife/partner deeply craves mint chocolate chip ice cream, and you hate mint chocolate chip ice cream, which is better: that they deny themselves the taste for the rest of their lives in honor of their love for you, or that you allow them to have it in honor of your love for them?

Honestly - I don't think this comparison works, as cute as it is! 🙂

 

[realista_magica]

Well I wouldn't like playing with a guy who has a girlfriend... It wouldn't feel right.

 

[TicklesFemales]

Well to me tickling is not cheating unless it leads to sex. All I can say is that those that indulge in tickling or anything else with someone other than their significant other whether it be a man or a woman should always be discreet about it. I have known married people who play with others without their significant others knowing. We are all adults and adults will be adults and play. I also know couples who do like to meet other men or women for tickling. Some couples are even swingers. These are the consenting adults to playing with others. In any case what goes on between two adults consenting is their business and no one else's. If you engage in play with someone other than your significant other and they do not know about it be discreet about it.

 

[-Hari-]

Well to me tickling is not cheating unless it leads to sex. All I can say is that those that indulge in tickling or anything else with someone other than their significant other whether it be a man or a woman should always be discreet about it. I have known married people who play with others without their significant others knowing. We are all adults and adults will be adults and play. I also know couples who do like to meet other men or women for tickling. Some couples are even swingers. These are the consenting adults to playing with others. In any case what goes on between two adults consenting is their business and no one else's. If you engage in play with someone other than your significant other and they do not know about it be discreet about it.

Just my opinion of course but I think this is dreadful advice. It's not ok to do this unless it's been agreed that it's ok and if it's been agreed then you won't need to be discreet. It's simple, just imagine how your partner would feel about their significant other being discreet behind their back and enjoying a fetish with someone else.

 

[rhiannon]

Plus, as soon as you have to be discreet - it's cheating. It's that simple.

 

[TicklesFemales]

Yes I guess you are right its cheating if you do it behind your significant other's back without them knowing but again adults will be adults and if your significant other is not into what you like then their will be cheating but to not hamper your relationship with your significant other then you and who ever your cheating with need to be discreet. I have known married men and a married woman not to each other doing this with someone else and have been discreet about it so both their significant others did not find out and ruin their marriages.

 

[ticklemepls]

I couldn't disagree more.

If you're going to live your life at the mercy of your SO's ever-fluctuating opinion, it's going to be an egg-shell laden road.

Arriving at a somewhat "mutual decision" on where your boundaries lie has always worked best for me.

But then again, I don't like to be dictated to, and the controlling types never last long with me. Life is too short to have to answer to someone at home.
I have to do that at work for most of my waking hours. My SO doesn't pay very well, so I choose not to be dictated to.

uh... I could be wrong, but pretty sure that IS a boundary that's pretty clear between couples- and doesnt fluctuate. You cant establish that boundary unless you ask questions- so if you out and ask if they mind you playing with others, and they say yes... causing you to decide to go behind their back and do it anyways, it's cheating. Plain and simple. And clearly, you're single quite often- and frankly I pity anyone that dates you.

 

[-Hari-]

Yes I guess you are right its cheating if you do it behind your significant other's back without them knowing but again adults will be adults and if your significant other is not into what you like then their will be cheating but to not hamper your relationship with your significant other then you and who ever your cheating with need to be discreet. I have known married men and a married woman not to each other doing this with someone else and have been discreet about it so both their significant others did not find out and ruin their marriages.

That's thing though, it doesn't make it any less the wrong thing to do if they don't get caught. Adults will be adults yes, and that should mean being grown up and honest with your partner, not sneaking around behind their back like a child.

 

[DontAskJusTckle]

That's thing though, it doesn't make it any less the wrong thing to do if they don't get caught. Adults will be adults yes, and that should mean being grown up and honest with your partner, not sneaking around behind their back like a child.

You've an interesting concept of childhood, Hari. To me, it seems more childish to ask, "Mommy is it okay if I go play with Sylvia? I promise to be a good boy."

Then there's this idea that keeps being floated out there that if you tickle somebody and neglect to mention it to your SO, that somehow qualifies as "sneaking around behind their back." Does this mandate of full disclosure apply only to tickling, or does it apply to everything you do? If a guy stops at Baskin and Robbins for double scoop of butter pecan ice cream on the way home from badminton practice, and doesn't tell his SO, is that "sneaking around behind their back?"

If the answer to that question is "no," then what is different about undisclosed tickling that qualifies it as sneaking?

 

[-Hari-]

You've an interesting concept of childhood, Hari. To me, it seems more childish to ask, "Mommy is it okay if I go play with Sylvia? I promise to be a good boy."

Then there's this idea that keeps being floated out there that if you tickle somebody and neglect to mention it to your SO, that somehow qualifies as "sneaking around behind their back." Does this mandate of full disclosure apply only to tickling, or does it apply to everything you do? If a guy stops at Baskin and Robbins for double scoop of butter pecan ice cream on the way home from badminton practice, and doesn't tell his SO, is that "sneaking around behind their back?"

If the answer to that question is "no," then what is different about undisclosed tickling that qualifies it as sneaking?

Not exactly, I'm suggesting the adult thing to do is not to go behind your partners back to indulge in your fetish, not ask if it's ok.

You keep going back to trivial things like ice cream and golf etc 😛 theres a clear difference between having some extra ice cream or taking part in a sport without telling your partner, and meeting up with somebody to indulge in your fetish without telling your partner. It's a pretty reasonable notion to assume to assume there's a difference.

Example: I'm genuinely playing squash this weekend with a buddy, the girlfriend doesn't know and I'd be shocked beyond belief if she had a problem with that. It clearly isn't a problem. However, if I was to arrange a tickle session with someone and she found out, I imagine I would be lucky if I managed to avoid her leaving me. I'm a tickle Fetishist, I think about tickling more than I think about sex, it clearly earns it's place in the cheating hall of fame. So I wouldn't do that to her. I would however, have an extra scoop of ice cream 😛

 

[DontAskJusTckle]

Not exactly, I'm suggesting the adult thing to do is not to go behind your partners back to indulge in your fetish, not ask if it's ok.

So, you seem to be saying that it's childish to do it "behind their back" but you don't recommend seeking approval either.

That doesn't leave much in the way of options for those who seek to tickle outside of their significant relationship. The only option left I can see is to state your intentions without seeking approval.

"...Yeah, I love that old movie! That Chevy Chase always makes me laugh. Hey that reminds me, I'm going to Silvia's for a mutual tickling session Saturday and I'll probably have my cell phone turned off. Can't hear the damn thing over the wild laughter anyway, you know what I mean?....honey?....hello??...hmmm...cell tower must be on the fritz again...oh well."

You keep going back to trivial things like ice cream and golf etc 😛

Ah, so you HAVE noticed. Excellent! There's a reason I do that, Hari, and here's why. It's because I'm trying to establish where you tickling-is-cheating proponents draw the line that separates that which qualifies as cheating/sneaking from that which does not. I'm trying to get you to define the criteria by which you judge an activity as cheating/sneaking.

We both agree that sex and romance outside of a relationship is by default cheating. We both agree that playing golf or eating ice cream is not cheating. But we disagree on tickling. You say it's cheating. I say it isn't. So in order to present my argument, I'm trying to establish the formula by which you qualify an activity as cheating - to get you to say something like, "If A, B, and/or C are true about activity X, then it qualifies as cheating; and if A, B, and/or C is not true about activity X, then it's not cheating"

theres a clear difference between having some extra ice cream or taking part in a sport without telling your partner, and meeting up with somebody to indulge in your fetish without telling your partner. It's a pretty reasonable notion to assume to assume there's a difference.

I would agree if the fetish in question was sexual, as in a fetish for oral sex, or a breast fetish, etc. But tickling is not inherently sexual. If it was, then a lot of parents would go to jail for "sexually abusing" their children.

If there really is a "clear difference" then you should have no trouble demonstrating the nature of that difference that spells out exactly how tickling qualifies as cheating while the other activities don't.

Example: I'm genuinely playing squash this weekend with a buddy, the girlfriend doesn't know and I'd be shocked beyond belief if she had a problem with that. It clearly isn't a problem. However, if I was to arrange a tickle session with someone and she found out, I imagine I would be lucky if I managed to avoid her leaving me. I'm a tickle Fetishist, I think about tickling more than I think about sex, it clearly earns it's place in the cheating hall of fame. So I wouldn't do that to her. I would however, have an extra scoop of ice cream 😛

This is the closest I've seen to any specific criteria for cheating. I've emboldened two key phrases here that seem to be your cheating qualifiers. Now please forgive me if I've misinterpreted, but here they are as best as I can extrapolate them.

1. If the SO has a problem with Activity X, it's cheating.

I'm basing this on your statement you made, "I'd be shocked beyond belief if she had a problem with [you playing squash]." While you don't come out and say it, it's at least inferred that since she has no problem with it, it can't be cheating. If that's true then the converse would suggest that if she DID have a problem, that would be an indication of cheating. I think it's reasonable to conclude from what you said that you feel that her approval is to some degree a key metric by which you guage whether or not cheating has occurred.

This is disturbingly close to what I call the Rhiannon Dogma. According to Rhiannon, cheating is solely determined by the significant other. It doesn't matter what YOU think. If your SO decides that he/she is uncomfortable with something you do, it's flat out cheating, regardless of any objection you might have. You have absolutely zero say-so in the matter. She bases this "reasoning" on the fact that the SO is the one who can divorce/leave/walk out on you for engaging in the activity.

The obvious flaw in this thinking is that a SO can divorce/leave/walk out on you for any number of reasons, or for no reason at all. If a SO decides to leave you because of something you've done, that doesn't automatically qualify what you've done as cheating. They could be leaving you for a completely unreasonable reason, such as you playing squash.

I can't begin to come anywhere close to accepting this extremely one-sided philosophy that borders on dictatorship.​

2. If Activity X is something I think about more than sex, it's cheating.

I'm basing this off the the other highlighted phrase, where you said, "I'm a tickle Fetishist, I think about tickling more than I think about sex, it clearly earns it's place in the cheating hall of fame." Before I get into this one, let me say that it's refreshing to see that you differentiate between tickling and sex. Many (most?) tickle fetishists have difficulty with this distinction.

What many don't realize is that having a tickle fetish does not equate tickling with sex. They are still two entirely different activities. It is the activity itself that determines whether it is sexual, not our reactions to that activity. If somebody gets a hard-on from dancing with a pretty girl, that does not make that dance a sexual activity. Conversely, if a girl tries to give fellatio to a gay man and he doesn't get aroused, that felletatio is still a sexual act. I'm convinced it's this confusion between tickling and sex that causes many people on this forum to feel that tickling is cheating.

If thinking about an activity more than about sex somehow translated into cheating, then that would mean that a guy who thinks about his job more than he thinks about sex is cheating. In fact there are several activities that many people think about more than they think about sex. Music, art, studies, politics, religion...the list is endless.

So clearly this criteria comes nowhere near legitimacy.​

I've debunked two would-be qualifiers of cheating offered in this post. There are many others throughout this thread and others like it, such as the silly idea that if you ask anybody (including yourself) if an activity is cheating, well ask no more, it now IS cheating simply because you asked.

It all comes down to a couple of simple concepts. Cheating is a breaking of the rules. It has nothing to do with what you're comfortable with, or your feelings. Where there are no rules, there is no cheating. Tickling is cheating ONLY if there's been an agreement established between the two members of the relationship that precludes tickling outside of the relationship. If no such agreement has been made, it CAN'T be cheating.

So guys, if you're wondering if it's cheating on your SO to have a tickling session with another partner, the answer is a definite no. Have fun, confident in the knowledge that you are not violating trust or cheating in any way.

 

[-Hari-]

So, you seem to be saying that it's childish to do it "behind their back" but you don't recommend seeking approval either.

That doesn't leave much in the way of options for those who seek to tickle outside of their significant relationship. The only option left I can see is to state your intentions without seeking approval.

Bingo! Which in context is arguably as bad as stating they intend to romantically kiss or even have sex with someone else, also without seeking approval. This is a fetish we're talking about, before you go in the same circle again and bring up golf or something 😛

Ah, so you HAVE noticed. Excellent! There's a reason I do that, Hari, and here's why. It's because I'm trying to establish where you tickling-is-cheating proponents draw the line that separates that which qualifies as cheating/sneaking from that which does not. I'm trying to get you to define the criteria by which you judge an activity as cheating/sneaking.

We both agree that sex and romance outside of a relationship is by default cheating. We both agree that playing golf or eating ice cream is not cheating. But we disagree on tickling. You say it's cheating. I say it isn't. So in order to present my argument, I'm trying to establish the formula by which you qualify an activity as cheating - to get you to say something like, "If A, B, and/or C are true about activity X, then it qualifies as cheating; and if A, B, and/or C is not true about activity X, then it's not cheating"

Indulging in a fetish with someone else IS "sex and romance outside" and if it's outside of the relationship boundaries then it's cheating. Where do YOU draw the line in terms of what sex is? We all know see isn't limited to someone sticking their whowho-dilly and to someone else's cha cha or else it would be ok to do all sorts with someone outside the relationship boundaries and claim it isn't cheating: Oral sex, handjobs, foot fetish activities, groping, taking a dump on someones chest, you name it! But tickling when it's a fetish, falls into the same category. And when I say "as a fetish" there's obviously lines and that's where the sneaking comes in.

Example time again: My friendship circle, I have ticklish friends, will I tickle them playfully at times? Sure. Will I ask permission from the GF, of course not. Would I arrange to meet up for the sole purpose of having a tickle session? Hell no, that's where things step out ok "ok" terratory for me. I'd slap a mates arse too, but I wouldn't call it a spanking session 😀

I would agree if the fetish in question was sexual, as in a fetish for oral sex, or a breast fetish, etc. But tickling is not inherently sexual. If it was, then a lot of parents would go to jail for "sexually abusing" their children.

If there really is a "clear difference" then you should have no trouble demonstrating the nature of that difference that spells out exactly how tickling qualifies as cheating while the other activities don't.

Tickling isn't inherently sexual no. But that doesn't mean that it gets a get out of jail free card. To some people, most tickle fetishists I imagine, tickling is far more sexual and far more a turn on then the simple act of sex. Remember Fetishists aren't wired the same as what society classes as "normal". I never once got turned on watching porn involving sex, I spend a great deal of my teen life wondering why I wasn't getting the cheap thrills the other guys were getting from it. But stick a good tickling clip on and hey presto! Lap rocket engaged! And that changes the rules you have to live by in terms of whats ok. It's imoral to go behind your partners back and engage in the thing that turns you on with someone else. Your sexual desires should be saved for your partner, and that's why it's cheating. It's not the tickling that makes it cheating, its what the tickling MEANS to you.

This is the closest I've seen to any specific criteria for cheating. I've emboldened two key phrases here that seem to be your cheating qualifiers. Now please forgive me if I've misinterpreted, but here they are as best as I can extrapolate them.

1. If the SO has a problem with Activity X, it's cheating.

I'm basing this on your statement you made, "I'd be shocked beyond belief if she had a problem with [you playing squash]." While you don't come out and say it, it's at least inferred that since she has no problem with it, it can't be cheating. If that's true then the converse would suggest that if she DID have a problem, that would be an indication of cheating. I think it's reasonable to conclude from what you said that you feel that her approval is to some degree a key metric by which you guage whether or not cheating has occurred.

This is disturbingly close to what I call the Rhiannon Dogma. According to Rhiannon, cheating is solely determined by the significant other. It doesn't matter what YOU think. If your SO decides that he/she is uncomfortable with something you do, it's flat out cheating, regardless of any objection you might have. You have absolutely zero say-so in the matter. She bases this "reasoning" on the fact that the SO is the one who can divorce/leave/walk out on you for engaging in the activity.

he obvious flaw in this thinking is that a SO can divorce/leave/walk out on you for any number of reasons, or for no reason at all. If a SO decides to leave you because of something you've done, that doesn't automatically qualify what you've done as cheating. They could be leaving you for a completely unreasonable reason, such as you playing squash.

I can't begin to come anywhere close to accepting this extremely one-sided philosophy that borders on dictatorship.​

I don't see it quite that way, although there's something to it. It IS about what the partner thinks period. It's about what they think as a result of what you are and what your desires are. Of course the partner might not KNOW what your true desires are but that doesn't make it any more ok because I would still know that I was doing sexual things with people other than my partner and the sad thing is, if that was the case? My partner wouldn't even know I was taking my sex life to someone else instead of her. I would no I was cheating and she wouldn't and that's horrible.

2. If Activity X is something I think about more than sex, it's cheating.

I'm basing this off the the other highlighted phrase, where you said, "I'm a tickle Fetishist, I think about tickling more than I think about sex, it clearly earns it's place in the cheating hall of fame." Before I get into this one, let me say that it's refreshing to see that you differentiate between tickling and sex. Many (most?) tickle fetishists have difficulty with this distinction.

What many don't realize is that having a tickle fetish does not equate tickling with sex. They are still two entirely different activities. It is the activity itself that determines whether it is sexual, not our reactions to that activity. If somebody gets a hard-on from dancing with a pretty girl, that does not make that dance a sexual activity. Conversely, if a girl tries to give fellatio to a gay man and he doesn't get aroused, that felletatio is still a sexual act. I'm convinced it's this confusion between tickling and sex that causes many people on this forum to feel that tickling is cheating.

If thinking about an activity more than about sex somehow translated into cheating, then that would mean that a guy who thinks about his job more than he thinks about sex is cheating. In fact there are several activities that many people think about more than they think about sex. Music, art, studies, politics, religion...the list is endless.

So clearly this criteria comes nowhere near legitimacy.​

Interesting points, but you don't go and dance with a girl in order to get a hard-on, stuff happens sometimes and it's hot, that can't really be helped. I might get jumped by a bunch of girls and tickled until I jizz my pants and enjoy every second, it wouldn't be cheating. Going out of my way to arrange it though? Or arranging to go dancing with some other girl knowing full well my intentions where to indulge in my dancing with hot girls fetish behind my partners back.. yeh I would say that's close enough to cheating. It would have to be a dancing with hot girls fetish to be comparable as we already know tickling and dancing isn't automatically sexual.

There are clearly differences, and holes to poke etc, but no matter what way you look at it. If you're deliberately going to indulge in your sexual desires with someone else behind your partners back then in my books, that will always be cheating and that's a damn good outlook to live by if I want to remain a respected and loved partner in my relationship without breaking her heart because I took my sexual desires elsewhere. And that is the point.

It all comes down to a couple of simple concepts. Cheating is a breaking of the rules. It has nothing to do with what you're comfortable with, or your feelings. Where there are no rules, there is no cheating. Tickling is cheating ONLY if there's been an agreement established between the two members of the relationship that precludes tickling outside of the relationship. If no such agreement has been made, it CAN'T be cheating.

So guys, if you're wondering if it's cheating on your SO to have a tickling session with another partner, the answer is a definite no. Have fun, confident in the knowledge that you are not violating trust or cheating in any way.

More specifically, in this context cheating refers to being sexually unfaithful. Like you said, whether or not it's sexually unfaithful to sleep with other people or indulge in fetishes with other people is down to what sort of relationship we're talking about, I mean shit, it's some people sexual fantasy for you to do just that! There's whole swinger communities based around it the concept.

If tickling is your sexual desire then in my books it's automatically cheating to take that sexual desire elsewhere unless your relationship so happens to be geared that way. But if it isn't and you want to ask first, be my guest but I don't have much faith in a positive response I would prepare for a potential verbal smack down and arguments etc. The likelihood is VERY high but hey, you might get lucky. If you don't want to ask? Well either don't do it or be a cheat.

In case anyone's paying as much attention to this battle of theories as much as me and DontAskJusTckle. If you're in doubt, pick your advise wisely and take your time. Think about how much you care about your partners feelings and base your decision on that.

 

[ticklemepls]

Bingo! Which in context is arguably as bad as stating they intend to romantically kiss or even have sex with someone else, also without seeking approval. This is a fetish we're talking about, before you go in the same circle again and bring up golf or something 😛



Indulging in a fetish with someone else IS "sex and romance outside" and if it's outside of the relationship boundaries then it's cheating. Where do YOU draw the line in terms of what sex is? We all know see isn't limited to someone sticking their whowho-dilly and to someone else's cha cha or else it would be ok to do all sorts with someone outside the relationship boundaries and claim it isn't cheating: Oral sex, handjobs, foot fetish activities, groping, taking a dump on someones chest, you name it! But tickling when it's a fetish, falls into the same category. And when I say "as a fetish" there's obviously lines and that's where the sneaking comes in.

Example time again: My friendship circle, I have ticklish friends, will I tickle them playfully at times? Sure. Will I ask permission from the GF, of course not. Would I arrange to meet up for the sole purpose of having a tickle session? Hell no, that's where things step out ok "ok" terratory for me. I'd slap a mates arse too, but I wouldn't call it a spanking session 😀



Tickling isn't inherently sexual no. But that doesn't mean that it gets a get out of jail free card. To some people, most tickle fetishists I imagine, tickling is far more sexual and far more a turn on then the simple act of sex. Remember Fetishists aren't wired the same as what society classes as "normal". I never once got turned on watching porn involving sex, I spend a great deal of my teen life wondering why I wasn't getting the cheap thrills the other guys were getting from it. But stick a good tickling clip on and hey presto! Lap rocket engaged! And that changes the rules you have to live by in terms of whats ok. It's imoral to go behind your partners back and engage in the thing that turns you on with someone else. Your sexual desires should be saved for your partner, and that's why it's cheating. It's not the tickling that makes it cheating, its what the tickling MEANS to you.

This is the closest I've seen to any specific criteria for cheating. I've emboldened two key phrases here that seem to be your cheating qualifiers. Now please forgive me if I've misinterpreted, but here they are as best as I can extrapolate them.



I don't see it quite that way, although there's something to it. It IS about what the partner thinks period. It's about what they think as a result of what you are and what your desires are. Of course the partner might not KNOW what your true desires are but that doesn't make it any more ok because I would still know that I was doing sexual things with people other than my partner and the sad thing is, if that was the case? My partner wouldn't even know I was taking my sex life to someone else instead of her. I would no I was cheating and she wouldn't and that's horrible.




Interesting points, but you don't go and dance with a girl in order to get a hard-on, stuff happens sometimes and it's hot, that can't really be helped. I might get jumped by a bunch of girls and tickled until I jizz my pants and enjoy every second, it wouldn't be cheating. Going out of my way to arrange it though? Or arranging to go dancing with some other girl knowing full well my intentions where to indulge in my dancing with hot girls fetish behind my partners back.. yeh I would say that's close enough to cheating. It would have to be a dancing with hot girls fetish to be comparable as we already know tickling and dancing isn't automatically sexual.

There are clearly differences, and holes to poke etc, but no matter what way you look at it. If you're deliberately going to indulge in your sexual desires with someone else behind your partners back then in my books, that will always be cheating and that's a damn good outlook to live by if I want to remain a respected and loved partner in my relationship without breaking her heart because I took my sexual desires elsewhere. And that is the point.



More specifically, in this context cheating refers to being sexually unfaithful. Like you said, whether or not it's sexually unfaithful to sleep with other people or indulge in fetishes with other people is down to what sort of relationship we're talking about, I mean shit, it's some people sexual fantasy for you to do just that! There's whole swinger communities based around it the concept.

If tickling is your sexual desire then in my books it's automatically cheating to take that sexual desire elsewhere unless your relationship so happens to be geared that way. But if it isn't and you want to ask first, be my guest but I don't have much faith in a positive response I would prepare for a potential verbal smack down and arguments etc. The likelihood is VERY high but hey, you might get lucky. If you don't want to ask? Well either don't do it or be a cheat.

In case anyone's paying as much attention to this battle of theories as much as me and DontAskJusTckle. If you're in doubt, pick your advise wisely and take your time. Think about how much you care about your partners feelings and base your decision on that.

Honestly, I'm confused by the argument that the s/o is the only one that determines what cheating (or right/wrong) is. That's a load of bull. You cant tell me that in every relationship people come up with clear lines of what they are, and are not, comfortable with. So with that argument it seems to me they're saying that if YOUR s/o went out and slept with someone behind your back, and they're ok with it, that means it's not cheating? Yeah, doubtful. If you have to go out of your way to arrange a meeting for fetish play (which 9 of 10 times people consider an intimate thing)- and PURPOSELY neglect to tell the s/o, it's wrong. All other points are invalid. If you have a mutual agreement that you're allowed to play with people, but she might not want to know the details, that's different. But unless that boundary is established, it's cheating- and going out of your way to hide it is the proof.

 

[DontAskJusTckle]

Plus, as soon as you have to be discreet - it's cheating. It's that simple.

That's patently absurd. A husband planning a surprise party for his wife has to be discreet. That doesn't make him a cheater.

And what happened to the Rhiannon Dogma? I'm talking about your repeated insistence that only the SO can decide what behaviors qualify as cheating? Now you're saying that being discreet about an activity makes it cheating??

Let me know when you make up your mind.

If your partner knows about it and is cool with it, it's not cheating. If you keep it from them, or they are not comfortable with it, it is cheating. It's hardly rocket science.

No, not rocket science at all. Just your opinion, and about as far from rocket science as it gets.

Honestly, it seems like an amusingly obvious answer, A physical, sexual, activity that indulges a sexual fetish with a person who is not your S/O, while possibly being kept secret from the S/O or even done with their knowledge but without regard to how they feel about it... How is that anything BUT cheating unless the S/O specifically says so?

Because we're not talking about a sexual activity or a sexual fetish. We're talking about tickling.

Obviously it's being kept a secret for a reason, and you can only delude yourself as to what that reason is for so long

Or you can forgo delusion altogether and simply refuse to wring your hands over a lot of needless guilt.

Bingo! Which in context is arguably as bad as stating they intend to romantically kiss or even have sex with someone else, also without seeking approval.

Sorry, Hari. That's an argument that would easily suffer defeat at the hands of even a novice debater.

This is a fetish we're talking about, before you go in the same circle again and bring up golf or something 😛

Tickling is not a fetish. It's an activity. The word fetish only describes a particular level of interest in the activity by a particular person or persons. That level of interest doesn't change the activity into something new that it wasn't before.

When somebody develops a fetish for tickling, the only thing that has changed is their thoughts and attitudes toward the tickling. It most certainly does not transform tickling into a sexual activity.

Indulging in a fetish with someone else IS "sex and romance outside" and if it's outside of the relationship boundaries then it's cheating.

I think I've demonstrated pretty conclusively that it is not.

Where do YOU draw the line in terms of what sex is?

One place I definitely draw that line is right at the notion that sex is one thing for this person, but something else for another person. That is bullshit on steroids, my friend.

We all know see isn't limited to someone sticking their whowho-dilly and to someone else's cha cha or else it would be ok to do all sorts with someone outside the relationship boundaries and claim it isn't cheating: Oral sex, handjobs,

Those are both clearly sexual activities that involve direct stimulation of the genitals that's very likely to result in an orgasm. It would be hopeless to try and defend either of them as not sexual, as Bill Clinton found out.

...foot fetish activities...

Kind of vague here. Foot fetish activies can range from scoping feet at the beach all the way to sucking the toes of a 45 year old cougar. The scoping can't be interpreted as sex in any way shape or form. The toe sucking? While not sex, it's a little too close to kissing to be considered a platonic act.

...groping...

That depends on what is being groped. If it's a crotch or a breast, we're talking about deliberate stimulation of the errogenous zones. In other words, sexual behavior. If it's a shoulder or elbow, probably not so much.

...taking a dump on someones chest...

LOL. Here in our side of the pond, we call that a "Cleveland Steamer."

But tickling when it's a fetish, falls into the same category.

Except tickling is never a fetish. It's an activity, The term fetish only applies to someone's interest in that activity. I'll assume that what you mean is "Tickling, when somebody has a fetish for it, falls into the same category."

Same category as what? I mean, oral sex and handjobs fall into the category of sex. But surely a Cleveland Steamer doesn't.

And when I say "as a fetish" there's obviously lines and that's where the sneaking comes in.

Whatever lines are drawn with tickling have to apply to everybody, Hari. We're all human beings here. We're all part of the same species. Whatever qualifies as sex to one qualifies as sex to everybody.

Example time again: My friendship circle, I have ticklish friends, will I tickle them playfully at times? Sure. Will I ask permission from the GF, of course not. Would I arrange to meet up for the sole purpose of having a tickle session? Hell no, that's where things step out ok "ok" terratory for me.

The key phrase here is "for me." It sounds like you're talking about a guilty conscience. I can understand you not wanting to feed it, but it doesn't give you the right to say, "Well, since tickling outside of my relationship makes me feel guilty and/or uncomfortable, that means it's cheating." Some of us tickle outside of our significant relationships with no such compunctions at all. We are AOK with it. We don't ask if it's cheating because we know it isn't. We don't have to be discreet, but rather freely choose to be discreet.

I'd slap a mates arse too, but I wouldn't call it a spanking session 😀

Hey man, if it's all the same to you, I'd prefer to just shake hands. 😛

Tickling isn't inherently sexual no. But that doesn't mean that it gets a get out of jail free card.

Interesting choice of words there. More on this, later.

To some people, most tickle fetishists I imagine, tickling is far more sexual and far more a turn on then the simple act of sex.

I think it would be more accurate to say, "Some people, most tickle fetishists I imagine, regard tickling with a considerably greater interest than the mainstream does - an interest that often eclipses their interest in sex."

I say it that way because your way suggests that tickling is one thing to most people and another thing altogether with tickle fetishists. It's not. It's the same thing. The only difference is our reaction to it.

Remember Fetishists aren't wired the same as what society classes as "normal". I never once got turned on watching porn involving sex, I spend a great deal of my teen life wondering why I wasn't getting the cheap thrills the other guys were getting from it. But stick a good tickling clip on and hey presto! Lap rocket engaged! And that changes the rules you have to live by in terms of whats ok.

Who on Earth told you that? No, the rules were already established long before either one of us were born. They only change if you willingly change them, and even then, you can only change them for yourself. None of us have the authority to change them for anybody else.

It's imoral to go behind your partners back and engage in the thing that turns you on with someone else.

Why?

Your sexual desires should be saved for your partner, and that's why it's cheating.

SEXUAL desires yes. Tickling desires are something else altogether, as has been demonstrated time and time again.

It's not the tickling that makes it cheating, its what the tickling MEANS to you.

LOL. Are we getting religious here? Tickling means the same thing to me that it does to everybody else. Touching a ticklish spot to induce laughter.

I don't see it quite that way, although there's something to it. It IS about what the partner thinks period. It's about what they think as a result of what you are and what your desires are. Of course the partner might not KNOW what your true desires are but that doesn't make it any more ok because I would still know that I was doing sexual things with people other than my partner and the sad thing is, if that was the case? My partner wouldn't even know I was taking my sex life to someone else instead of her.

Alas, I suppose it was too much to ask of a tickle fetishist, to seperate sex from tickling. Regardless of whatever thrill you get from it, tickling is not sex. It can be mixed with sex, just like whipped cream can, but it's not sex any more than whipped cream is. So if you engage with tickling outside of your relationship, you are not "taking your sex life to another person."

I really feel bad for you, Hari. You spoke of a "get out of jail free" card. That's a more apt analogy than you realize. You're incarcerated in a prison of guilt and self-imposed restrictions. Your friends have the freedom and luxury to indulge in tickling as much as they like, conscience free. But if you do it, you are penalized, criminalized and ostracized, all for simply liking it more than they do. And all this condemnation is brought on not by society. But by your own guilty conscience.

It's time break away from such balderdash. Free your mind, Neo.

Tickle fetishists have a wonderful advantage that the rest of the world will never know. They have sex. We have tickling. They have to do their thing behind closed doors and sans clothes. We can do our thing in public settings, fully clothed.

The societal rules that apply to sex don't apply to tickling, unless we make a conscious decision to apply them, which in my book is pointless and silly.

 

[ticklemepls]

Tickling is not a fetish. It's an activity. The word fetish only describes a particular level of interest in the activity by a particular person or persons. That level of interest doesn't change the activity into something new that it wasn't before.

So... If I've got a healthy "interest" in sex... and I cannot get what I want at home, and it's mearly an interest... going behind my S/O's back would be ok? Interesting thought.

Oh btw- the surprise party analogy, is reaching, that's something that you DO FOR your S/O... as something for them, a treat, a special event....... it's not meeting up with someone behind their back to engage in an activity that you casually compare to golf or video games.....

Granted, yes, for SOME people tickling is not sexual... but for the general population it is... and so in GENERAL yes, it's cheating. Again, if you have to out and hide the activity from your S/O, you're clearly feeling like you're doing something wrong, therefore...................................... if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck it sure as hell aint a fricken moose.

 

[RealisticSwitch]

The amount of time and energy required to read all 5 pages of posts seems too intense right now, so I'll just post my response, and if I'm beating the proverbial dead horse, so be it.

You are asking for an objective answer to a subjective question. In order to partake in "cheating", one has to do something that makes a person feel "cheated", and each person feels cheated in different ways.

Thus, what will qualify as cheating to one person does not necessarily mean it's cheating to someone else.

So, in order to fully answer your question (since I'm assuming the OP wants to tickle someone outside of their relationship, and is looking for arguments to support them doing so), you have to ask yourself "Will __________ be upset, hurt or feel cheated if I do this?" That's the only way you can know for sure.

This needs to immediately be followed by a second question. "Do I care if they feel this way?" Harsh as it is to type, you might not. You might be just fine with them feeling cheated, and while I would recommend re-evaluating the entire relationship at that point, it's a point worth considering.

Once you've considered those questions, you'll have a better idea of what you want to do.

 

[Wolf]

The amount of time and energy required to read all 5 pages of posts seems too intense right now, so I'll just post my response, and if I'm beating the proverbial dead horse, so be it.
You are asking for an objective answer to a subjective question. In order to partake in "cheating", one has to do something that makes a person feel "cheated", and each person feels cheated in different ways.
Thus, what will qualify as cheating to one person does not necessarily mean it's cheating to someone else.
So, in order to fully answer your question (since I'm assuming the OP wants to tickle someone outside of their relationship, and is looking for arguments to support them doing so), you have to ask yourself "Will __________ be upset, hurt or feel cheated if I do this?" That's the only way you can know for sure.
This needs to immediately be followed by a second question. "Do I care if they feel this way?" Harsh as it is to type, you might not. You might be just fine with them feeling cheated, and while I would recommend re-evaluating the entire relationship at that point, it's a point worth considering.
Once you've considered those questions, you'll have a better idea of what you want to do.

Very succinctly put.

Of course, that type of honest introspection would eliminate the need to raise the question in the first place, now, wouldn't it?