Non-Con Tickling: Don't Vanillas Do It All The Time?

[Mitchell]

Gentler makes some very interesting points, and I thank him for his point of view. I didn't think of it in terms of hypocricsy, but, in effect, he's right.


Mitch

 

[Phineas]

I've read some posts here about Non-Con tickling. I never believe in forcing someone to do something against their will that they dont want to, but, if we really think about it, isn't most tickling that takes place in the vanilla world really non-con? Thoughts?

Good question. Couple of different points to address.

For one, I generally don't go tickling people that I either don't know personally, or that I haven't tickled before and don't know how they're going to react. The reason for this is because I've had a couple of very embarrassing situations during my younger days where the person I tickled either screamed, got really angry, or otherwise brought the pain. And let me tell you, you haven't been humiliated until someone's screamed at you, "Will you keep your hands to YOURSELF?" in a group of two dozen.

So, yea. I generally only tickle someone in a romantic or flirtatious context.

As to the vanillas, sure; it's non-con. The problem is, vanillas generally don't tickle because of a sexual pretense, like we do. It's the sex that puts a different spin on it. And, in general, I don't feel that foistering your own sexual gratification on an unknowing participant is a good idea.

I've had a couple experiences in the past where people found out I had a fetish, and put two and two together. It changed our relationships. In some cases, they stopped speaking to me. In others, nearly so. So when I say "what they don't know won't hurt 'em" is a load of baloney, I'm saying that not because I'm a self-righteous prick who likes to stick his nose in other people's business. I'm saying it because I have direct experience with it blowing up in my face. Spectacularly so.

 

[eric33]

I've read some posts here about Non-Con tickling. I never believe in forcing someone to do something against their will that they dont want to, but, if we really think about it, isn't most tickling that takes place in the vanilla world really non-con?

With us as ticklephiles, we have our gatherings, or our partners who we know share our interest, and we have specific scenarios, where the lees get tied up, and tickled. The lee and ler agree on the terms.

In the vanilla world, say, where a husband tickles his wife, or a bf tickles his gf, I dont see situations where the gf or wife is asked if she can be tickled. The guy comes up behind her, and pins her down, or gets her ribs, or her feet, and she gets tickled. Before I joined this site, and I realized I was into tickling, I dont recall ever asking a girl if I could tickle her, or a girl asking me if she could tickle me. It just happened. Most vanilla girls who are even somewhat ticklish, would probably say no to their partners if the partners asked to tickle them, because, in my experience, most vanilla girls hate to be tickled.

So, that's the topic. I'm not a fan of non-con tickling, but, in reality, isn't most or all tickling in the vanilla world non con?

Thoughts?

Mitch

My opinion from watching my son and his GF is that they may be goofing around and it,s non-con but actually , and i asked him , he said it a great way to " cop a feel "...horny teenagers.

 

[dad2]

But guys seriously I just had an epiphany right ok I grab my girlfriends ass right and she's surprised but obviously not horrified or violated feel me so yeah then I realize she'd be just as surprised if i didn't know her so technically me going to the mall and grabbing strangers asses for thrills really isn't that far of a stretch, ya feel me cuz it's like same principal, ass grabbing is all transitive, amirite?

No, not even this lengthy run-on abuse of grammar and spelling is in the slightest bit convincing, surprising as that may be. Maybe if you try sticking to the topic, you might actually make a viable point. We're talking about the differences in how vanilla tickling is viewed from fetish tickling. Your ass-grabbing scenario doesn't apply, even if it does tell us something of the nature of your relationships with women.

I've had a couple experiences in the past where people found out I had a fetish, and put two and two together. It changed our relationships. In some cases, they stopped speaking to me. In others, nearly so. So when I say "what they don't know won't hurt 'em" is a load of baloney, I'm saying that not because I'm a self-righteous prick who likes to stick his nose in other people's business. I'm saying it because I have direct experience with it blowing up in my face. Spectacularly so.

I appreciate your candor, Phineas. Your experience has taught you some painful lessons. I can definitely understand that.

But you aren't the only one with experience. I too have had friends and relatives discover that my tickling obsession is also prevalent in my sexuality. Most were amused. Few were surprised, and of those few only a couple were genuinely creeped out by it. I decided to completely ignore their reactions and carry on as I always have. Life is too short to let people bring you down.

On the other side of that coin, some female friends and relatives having found out my "secret" would take every opportunity to dare me to tickle them. I have adult nieces that still initiate tickle fights with me at our yearly family picnic. And I know that they know.

Why do they still do it when they know? Because they know my character and they know that nothing beyond tickling will ever happen. They accept me for who I am, not for what interests me in the bedroom.

Most importantly, they know that even in the context of fetish, tickling is still just tickling, and is not a sexual act.

 

[Comfort Eagle]

Your ass-grabbing scenario doesn't apply, even if it does tell us something of the nature of your relationships with women.

...you're serious huh. Wow.

We're talking about the differences in how vanilla tickling is viewed from fetish tickling.

Yeah, one doesn't assume you're suppressing a raging hard-on while you're clawing at them. I have no idea about your freaky family reunions where everyone plays "Let's go tease Uncle with his tickle fetish lawl!", most of the times I've heard of people letting their children play strange tickle games with their uncles it usually ends up being mentioned in therapy.

But hey, don't let that bring you down.

 

[dad2]

...you're serious huh. Wow.

Ah, the envy. Not to worry, kid. Some day you'll get serious too.

Yeah, one doesn't assume you're suppressing a raging hard-on while you're clawing at them.

That would be quite a faulty assumption for either scenario, though I'm sure that fact won't stop you from making it.

I have no idea about your freaky family reunions where everyone plays "Let's go tease Uncle with his tickle fetish lawl!"

I agree. You truly have no idea. Maybe you didn't read where I said they were adult. That being the case, they would never say "lawl."

most of the times I've heard of people letting their children play strange tickle games with their uncles it usually ends up being mentioned in therapy.

The voice of experience. I'm sure your therapist is willing to move on as soon as you're ready to let it go.

But hey, don't let that bring you down.

Of course not. Why would I? I barely know you.

 

[Comfort Eagle]

Ah, the envy. Not to worry, kid. Some day you'll get serious too.

The voice of experience. I'm sure your therapist is willing to move on as soon as you're ready to let it go.

Haha, the tickleboard "I am a grown up, I am wise!" routine. You aren't the first to do it, I assure you, but it never stops being funny. Boy, I can't wait til I'm a middle aged man dissecting sarcastic remarks on a fetish forum. What a life that must be!

That would be quite a faulty assumption for either scenario

So a woman being tickled should just sort of know if a guy is tickling her, it's so he can get his rocks off?

 

[Eternal Tomboy]

Wow, some of you guys are WAY over thinking this one. The original question posed was a simple one: Isn't most tickling in the vanilla world non-con? And to me, the answer is just as simple: Yes, it is. Mitchell didn't say anything about fetishes, bondage, tickling complete strangers, etc. when he asked the question.

In ALL my years of growing up, never ONCE did a guy ask me permission, or make me sign a consent form before he tickled me 🙄. I can't even count the number of times I was held down by one of my guy friends and tickled to the point of screaming and begging for them to stop. And we're not talking seconds here, I've had tickle fights that lasted as long as 20 minutes or more.

And they didn't know about my love for tickling, so I can't even say that they were just tickling me because they knew I secretly loved it. Hell, it was even before I became fully aware of my love for tickling. This was just straight-up, old fashion tickle torture. Happens ALL the time, folks. Just as plain play fighting/wrestling/etc. happens between friends. You don't see anyone asking for permission or parameters before that kind of play happens, do you? No, most times someone gets jumped, and the fight doesn't stop until someone is pinned down/put in a headlock/etc. and is forced to say "uncle". It's just friends messing with friends for fun. Not a big deal.

Now, do we need consent for our kind of tickle play? Yes, because bondage and seriously prolonged periods of tickling usually factor into the play. And in that instance, I do believe that consent is necessary..... but again, that's not what Mitchell was talking about. Those are two completely separate topics of discussion.

 

[Phineas]

Wow, some of you guys are WAY over thinking this one. The original question posed was a simple one: Isn't most tickling in the vanilla world non-con?

I don't think we're over-thinking it, because the reason the question was posted was because of some of the recent discussions about non-con tickling being bad because there are tickle fetishists involved. Although, I could be misinterpreting the question.

On the other side of that coin, some female friends and relatives having found out my "secret" would take every opportunity to dare me to tickle them. I have adult nieces that still initiate tickle fights with me at our yearly family picnic. And I know that they know.

It has also been my experience that even knowing about our fetish doesn't cause some people to "get it". I, like you, have a similar set of circumstances whereby vanilla female friends found out I had a foot fetish and then would go out of their way to get my opinion on their pedicures, give me their feet to rub, etc. Once, I asked one of them (because I was interested in her) if she realized what, exactly she was doing, and that letting me touch her feet turned me on. She looked at me blankly, and I said, "Uh, hello.. foot fetish. Feet, to me, are like boobs to other guys. When you invite me to touch your feet, it'd be like inviting another guy to grab your breasts."

She got real quiet-like and said, "wow. I didn't know."

So, yeah. I have the feeling that if you took your nieces aside and said, "you do know that tickling turns me on, right?" that their activities would probably immediately cease forthwith. Then again, like me, you could be one of those rare folks who likes both playful, non-sexual tickling and also tickling in the context of your kink. But when we discuss a lot of the kinds of tickling that go on around here, yes. It's not really innocent. The line is fuzzy at best.

 

[rhiannon]

Vlad, I think you are in the wrong thread. 😉 But hearing that kind of trick and knowing which thread you are talking about - that is really really messed up!!

 

[Red faction]

Wow, some of you guys are WAY over thinking this one. The original question posed was a simple one: Isn't most tickling in the vanilla world non-con? And to me, the answer is just as simple: Yes

Isn't most tickling in the vanilla world non-con? (yes it is)
But i love watching a good old TMF bitch fight

 

[Mitchell]

For those who said that they were tickled and not asked, I must confess, I'm guilty of non-con myself, but, it was when I was a vanilla, and long before I realized tickling was a turn on.

Two experiences I recall clearly, with girls where loving feelings existed on both sides, but we couldnt get together, due to circumstances.

Freshman year in college: I start hanging out with this girl Lora. We really liked each other, but she was going through a confusing time, where she thought frat guys were it. When I asked her to be serious, she told me she really cared about me, but wanted to play the field. Fine. Sexual tension still existed between us.

One night, we're in her room, and she's lying on her bed, face down. She says something like "Mitch, I'm sore, give me a massage". Naturally, I did.
I start massaging her. Back,. sides, legs, etc. When I get to her feet, she was barefoot, and I started rubbing them. Finally, I pinned down her legs and feet, and began tickling her soles. She went nuts, and said something like "If you dont stop tickling me, I'm going to want you to stop massaging me". Due to the fact that I was more into touching Lora's body, then tickling, back then, I stopped, as the big thing to me was to get to touch Lora, and not to tickle her. I didnt ask Lora if I could tickle her, it just happened.

Several years later, when I was a senior in college, I had another friend, Stacy. Before she met me, she started going out with a good friend of mine, but then realized she really loved me. It was an extremely awkward situation. The incidents where I tickled Stacy aren't as clear in my mind as the one where I tickled Lora. All I remember is tickling Stacy's ribs a couple of times, without asking. She knew I had a foot fetish, because I told her. Stacy said something like "I'd probably let you tickle my feet if you wanted to, but I might go crazy if you did, because I'm really ticklish". The opportunity to tickle Stacy's feet didn't happen, but, if it had, I doubt I would have asked her, I just would have done it.

I'm beginning to think the whole non con thing is because the people who are tickling are consciously aware they have a fetish, so there is a stigma is doing something sexually related to another person, without consent.

It's the same when it comes to foot fetishism: I'm sure plenty of guys without foot fetishes might kiss their gfs feet and suck on their toes, during sex, and it would be no biggie. As a guy with a foot fetish, though, I'd want to explain my fetish to any girl I was with, so that if she saw me getting excited while doing it, she wouldnt think I was creepy for wanting to touch her feet, without her knowing why.

I guess it boils down to alterior motives. Vanillas dont think "Oh, I'm going to tickle this girl to get turned on". They think: I'm doing it to be funny, or to play around with them." In that concept, non con is no biggie. However, a tickle fetishist guy like myself is viewed in a different light. I'm sure if I dated someone, and tickled her, and then said something like "When I tickle you, it turns me on. I get an erection, or I fantasize about myself or someone else tickling you". That would creep her out, especially if she wasnt into this.

Unfortunately, there is a huge double standard between fetishist acceptable behavior, and non fetishist acceptable behavior. It will probably always be that way, because, not many people outside our world of interest understand why we like tickling or other fetishes, and why they turn us on so much.

Mitch

 

[Deadsea7777]

As to the vanillas, sure; it's non-con. The problem is, vanillas generally don't tickle because of a sexual pretense, like we do. It's the sex that puts a different spin on it. And, in general, I don't feel that foistering your own sexual gratification on an unknowing participant is a good idea.

I agree is the sex we put in it what makes a big difference. All vanillas tickling is non con. You can extend this a bit further, to other forms of touching like kissing or caressing.
You do not ask permission to caress a child to display affection, or you do not ask permission to give a kiss to your mother, father or your niece or son or to say hello to a woman with a kiss on the cheek. But to give a french kiss or heavenly caressing somebody you may not ask formally for permission, but you sense the waters and you know you are welcome to do it. Most of kissing and caressing also happens in vanilla environment, and in that sense is Non Con nobody ask permission. But when it implies sexual gratification, it always is between consenting adults, either explicit or implicit. And when tickling implies sexual gratification is the same. The only difference is the most of people do not find tickling as sexually gratifying, as caressing or kissing, so it is a fetish. The rest is the same.

 

[Bohemianne]

That's all on the abstract side of things or somewhat centered on the "proper" execution or what not. But you haven't covered the physical side because it seems that non-con tickling is more applicable to a stronger tickler done to a weaker lee.

It's no longer a question whether it is for vanilla people or fetishists... but if let's say a female has that seasonal impulsive urge to sneak tickles with a vanilla man who hates it, she could end up getting punched or hurt....umm....say by strong reflex. Otherwise, she has to do all the earthly persuasion just to get him submit to getting tied first.

So unless she really does something to get the man immobilized, well, then it will remain as is... non-con tickling is always aggressively a male thing, but because they can succeed with it better or it is inherent in their nature to initiate. Otherwise, it will just be a casual tease that won't last long, or something that could last if the lee is "paid" to do it (consensually sweating it for money but not really liking it).

Now this makes me think a bit... But coffee break is over.

You have the pro noncon group who enjoy tickling people against their will, or at least enjoy stories or videos depicting it. They aren't interested in the right or wrong of it because it's just tickling. It's not rape nor is it any way violent.

Then you have the moral minority who stand on their pulpits and soap boxes and decree that we who enjoy tickling more than most are morally bound to follow these strict rules of engagement.

1. Never tickle without first asking permission.

2. Never tickle without first making it clear that it's a sexual fetish for you.

3. Never tickle without first knowing the victim for X number of years.​

But when it comes to grayer areas like non con tickling, we're not all going to be in sync with each other's moral imperatives. That's where the problems come. Trying to enforce one's morality on others. I understand the overpowering sense of self righteousness indignation that fires your shrill condemnations, but you still can't expect people to take you seriously.

Bottom line, if you don't feel right about non con tickling, just don't do it.

It's that simple.

 

[SlaverTickler]

To paraphrase Captain James T. Kirk, "I don't believe in the Vanilla Scenario.". Everybody has a fetish. They may not know they have it, they may not realize it's a fetish, or call it a fetish (because the associate that word with being a pervert), but everybody has something that does it for them.

 

[rhiannon]

Which means exactly what for this thread?