Is tickling with bondage necessarily BDSM?

[Barney Stubble]

It's been suggested in another thread that any tickling that involves bondage is an act of BDSM.

Do you agree with this statement? Or is it possible to tie and tickle somebody completely outside of a BDSM context?

I don't know if there's a right or wrong answer, but if I had to give one I'd probably answer in the negative. I mean, it certainly can be incorporated in a BDSM scenario. But to me, BDSM is about control and subjugation to the will of another. Where tickling applies to BDSM is when it is used as a means to achieve this subjugation.

But for those who simply get off on tickling for its own sake, BDSM is simply one of many scenarios by which it can occur.

Bondage? For many, it's simply a safety precaution much like the seat belts and shoulder harnesses in our cars. The fact that it adds an extra dimension of vulnerability is a plus.

Discipline? Sure, tickling is good for that, but only few real life instances of tickling are for this purpose.

Dominance? Some say the ler is in a dominant position whenever they are tickling a restrained victim. Most times that's probably true unless the victim requests or demands to be tickled. I've been tickled as a repayment for favors I've done. In a sense, I was the dominant in those scenarios since the tickler was trying to meet my satisfaction.

Submission? Some never do submit. They just endure until they are freed to enact revenge.

Sadism/Masochism? Tickling can be quite sadistic, but it can also be a gesture of affection and an attempt to cheer somebody up. Moreover, people can want it not for the sake of torture but for it's therapeutic benefits.

To sum it all up, there are many tickling scenarios that fall into one of the BDSM categories I mentioned, but I don't believe it's realistic to say that any tickling involving bondage is BDSM

It's been suggested in another thread that any tickling that involves bondage is an act of BDSM.

Do you agree with this statement? Or is it possible to tie and tickle somebody completely outside of a BDSM context?

I don't know if there's a right or wrong answer, but if I had to give one I'd probably answer in the negative. I mean, it certainly can be incorporated in a BDSM scenario. But to me, BDSM is about control and subjugation to the will of another. Where tickling applies to BDSM is when it is used as a means to achieve this subjugation.

But for those who simply get off on tickling for its own sake, BDSM is simply one of many scenarios by which it can occur.

Bondage? For many, it's simply a safety precaution much like the seat belts and shoulder harnesses in our cars. The fact that it adds an extra dimension of vulnerability is a plus.

Discipline? Sure, tickling is good for that, but only few real life instances of tickling are for this purpose.

Dominance? Some say the ler is in a dominant position whenever they are tickling a restrained victim. Most times that's probably true unless the victim requests or demands to be tickled. I've been tickled as a repayment for favors I've done. In a sense, I was the dominant in those scenarios since the tickler was trying to meet my satisfaction.

Submission? Some never do submit. They just endure until they are freed to enact revenge.

Sadism/Masochism? Tickling can be quite sadistic, but it can also be a gesture of affection and an attempt to cheer somebody up. Moreover, people can want it not for the sake of torture but for it's therapeutic benefits.

To sum it all up, there are many tickling scenarios that fall into one of the BDSM categories I mentioned, but I don't believe it's realistic to say that any tickling involving bondage is BDSM.

What do you think?

 

[Flatfoot]

BDSM is a very broad term, so it's hard to say. The first thing it makes ME think of, though, are the D/S elements, which I don't necessarily think are true. I love incorporating bondage during play, because it maximizes the helplessness and the sensations. However, I don't really like to incorporate disciplinary/controlling aspects, because it seems the older I get, that just seems on par with manipulation, and I don't like people having control over whether or not I'm going to enjoy myself based upon how well I follow their directions.

 

[Sleepy Jean]

I don't care much. Just tie me up and tickle me to orgasm. Call it whatever you like. I call it sensual pleasure.

 

[milagros317]

It depends on the attitude of the participants, but I do consider tickling with bondage to be a form of BDSM. And I love it.

 

[Tickled Guy]

Ok Heres what wikpedia says:

BDSM is a consensual lifestyle choice, or type of adult roleplay between two or more individuals. The compound acronym, BDSM, is derived from the terms bondage and discipline (B&D), dominance and submission (D&S), sadism and masochism (S&M)

BDSM includes a wide spectrum of activities, forms of interpersonal relationships, and distinct subcultures.

Activities and relationships within a BDSM context are characterized by the fact that the participants usually take on complementary, but unequal roles, thus the idea of consent of both the partners becomes essential. Typically participants who are active – applying the activity or exercising control over others – are known as tops or dominants. Those participants who are recipients of the activities, or who are controlled by their partners are typically known as bottoms or submissives. Individuals who assume both top/dominant and bottom/submissive roles—whether from relationship to relationship or within one relationship—are known as switches.[1]

My take is this:

bondage and discipline: hmm am I tying them up and doing something torturous?

dominance and submission: Sounds Like Ler and Lee

sadism and masochism: I've heard many ticklers called sadistic and many Lee's enjoy it

As far as the bdm lifestyle goes just the act of submitting to your top's will or making your bottom submit whether it be unrestrained masturbation training or suspended fucking with weighted fishooks in her nipples is technically BDSM in my opinion.

 

[TropicThunder]

I think that its all in the eye of the beholder.

 

[rhiannon]

I think tickling is definitely part of BDSM for a variety of reasons. There is the bondage part.

There is the play with dominance and submission - even though I am not a sub, I still do hand myself over to the control of the ler, whether I use the safeword or not, whether I do totally submit or not - it is definitely part of BDSM.

There is also the game with limits - how much can I take.

So yes, definitely BDSM.

 

[BellybTickler]

To echo the others, yes. BDSM covers a very broad range of kinks and fetishes, including tickling, and really can't be specified to one or the other.

 

[Coda]

BSDM isn't a simple term; the question deserves as much thinking as you gave it, and I doubt it can be answered decisively.

You could also put forth that a situation isn't BSDM because it includes bondage and sadism and discipline but not masochism. I bet people (even people steeped in the lifestyle) have different opinions about whether you need <I>any</I> of the aspects, or <I>all</I> of the aspects for it to count.

In any case you'd need a linguistics fetish for this to even occur to you, and data on adoption of the BSDML lifestyle is even scarcer right now.

 

[Skipadeedoodah]

I think it's all about what you're going for. I can't really think of one time that I've played with bondage, and only a few times that I've played without bondage, that there wasn't a certain level of dominance in the ler, because that's what I like. I love playful tickling and banter, too, but without that extra special RAWR something, it's not the same for me.

That said, I don't think you can draw a solid line separating tickling the way many of us enjoy it and BDSM. I think that they have the potential to overlap in too many ways to say "this is definitely tickling without BDSM and this is definitely tickling with BDSM." Furthermore, why bother?

 

[-Hari-]

completely depends on the atitudes of the people involved, making a sandwich can be a BDSM activity too, on the opposite side of things, tying someone up and beating them doesnt always have to be BDSM if the people involved arnt that way inclined, it may actually simply be a crime.

 

[Bohemianne]

I don't care much. Just tie me up and tickle me to orgasm. Call it whatever you like. I call it sensual pleasure.

YES! Why complicate it with cr@ppy earthly classifications.
I call it R-A-V-A-G-E ! Nothing more.

 

[P[a]pi]

A bondage/tickling session is not BDSM to me unless some other things are added to it. Most media in the tickling community is not BDSM to me either.

But obviously it's subjective.