Nonconsentual Tickling.....

[Dirkman]

No I'm not talking about the video, I want to talk about the concept, how it relates to the fetish, and who is into the "idea" --> (doesn't mean kidnapping the girl next door in real life), and who just isn't into it at all and thinks its sick.

I will for one thing say this: The appealing factor to any tickle fantasy for ME is nonconsentuality. Its the pleading, the screaming, and the torture of the victim against their will that make me like this. I feel free to say that, but I will also say that while this is a fantasy of mine, I would never act this out in real life, its not moral.

I have lurked here and there for a long time and I have read LOTS of stories. It is not secret that almost ALL of the stories written are nonconsentual scenarios, whether it is a kidnapping, a spy interrogation, or whatever. It seems that MANY people here have fantasies of nonconsentual tickling scenarios, but are also moral people, and don't want to admit such a thing. I want to tell those people this: You can be a moral person and have an immoral fantasy. its ok. really.

I've seen some incredibly ticklish and incredibly beautiful models get tickled in videos, but if they are smiling and seeming to have a good time, it really doesn't do much for me. And check this out: A few years back I was hooking up with a girl and I tested her with a quick tickle and she then told me she LOVED to be tickled. Some people here would love that and envy my situation.. I stopped calling her. On the contrary, I once was hooking up with another girl, we came back to her place and I offered to give her a foot massage. She said, "No way, I hate feet, and I hate my feet touched". Hmmm I thought. She then told me it was NOT because she was ticklish. Flash forward two months, we had been hooking up pretty steady, I told her I wanted to tie her up before sex. She agreed, I did, and then I took off her shoes and just a brush up against her sole sent her into screaming agony. I have never heard anything sweeter then her NOOOs, and for about two to three minutes, I really gave it to her. She got extremely pissed and told me to let her out, but then I apologized telling her that I didn't understand how much she hated it, then proceeded to untie her and have sex with her. Luckily after the hour of sex (ok ok half hour), all she said was "I will never be tied up again."

Whats the point of all this? I don't know. I will say that in a way, my situation sucks. Sometimes I wish I was an immoral asshole, but I am not, and although I love reading about kidnapping co workers and such, I would never do so. As for girlfriends, I have pushed many to the limit, but I would never dare to make someone else fear for their life. For now, the closest thing I have to satisfying this "nonconsentual tickling" fetish (not just tickling fetish) is some nonconsentual themed videos (I don't think any have been real yet, but its cool that they are there), and like i said in my other post, I search out bondage videos where a domina improvises by tickling an unwilling submissive. I hope for the future that some companies can at least include more nonconsentual storylines that at least seem realistic. Ok, enough about me, I've delurked, now what do you have to say?
Dirk

 

[Dave2112]

Well, you can tell by most of my stories that non-consentual is a theme with me, too. But as you said, they're just stories. My "Rebekah" story and the tale about Narin (plus the upcoming one) are not, however, and are among my favorite stories.
We all have our fantasies, and one of mine is taking a girl and tickling her against her will, breaking her. But that's all it is...a fantasy. I've been lucky enough to be with some women who would role-play that scene with me, and I can tell you that it can open new doors for you. Don't deny yourself the pleasure of living your fantasy, just open your mind a bit and find someone willing to understand your desires and help you achieve them. That's what it's all about, I think.
Don't underestimate the power of consentual tickling, though. Even though it may not have been your bag the first time around, with the right person it can be a wonderful experience. I wish you luck.😉

 

[MN Tikl]

Coming to grips with the subtle sadism of tickling

Very interesting topic, and one I've often thought about over the years.

At the risk of starting an argument, it is my opinion there really isn't such a thing as "consensual tickling." It's a contradiction in terms. Consensual tickling is merely caressing or massaging. Somebody may "consent" to being tickled by permitting you to tie them up, or standing still (at the outset) so you can lay your hands on them. But once you begin tickling somebody who is ticklish and is not immobilized in some way, they will attempt to get away. It's an involuntary response. If they don't jump away (or try to), you're simply not tickling them.

In the same vein, I think people are fooling themselves when they say they are tickling somebody to make the ticklee feel good. Tickling provokes an *involuntary* reaction that can resemble pleasure (i.e., laughing and smiling). But I would argue that being tickled and enjoying it is similiar to being spanked and enjoying it. The sensation itself is not pleasurable -- it's the 'psychological' overlay that causes a submissive person to enjoy it. The transfer of power, the submission, etc.

So what does this lead to? As controversial as this sounds, I think people who like to tickle others need to recognize that there is an element of sadism associated with it. It's not sadism in the sense that you want to hurt the other person. Rather, it's sadism in the sense that you are dominating another person; making their body do what *you* want it to do. Perhaps sadism is too strong a word. I know some will be uncomfortable with this terminology, because of its negative connotations. Maybe "control" or "domination" is a better description. Personally, I like to call it "subtle sadism".

Thoughts anybody? And before anybody takes too much offense (I realize I may be trampling on sacred territory here), let me add that this is just my opinion! I welcome agreement and disagreement!

 

[Myriads]

Sadism

Hello MN,

You approach Sadism as if it's a bad word that might bite (and it often does! 🙂 Though you are correct some folks here might have problems with it, so your caution IS warrented.

I'm a sadist. It's part of who I am sexualy. I enjoy the power it allows me to wield. It is indeed a big part of my tickling and other sex play. I use the term with pride.

Given that I don't abduct women and do as I will to them, my sadism must be expressed in the framework of some type of consensual agreement.

But within those boundries I have a lot of latitiude to be pretty harsh with those I play. Knowing thier limits I can push very hard, and take them places that they dislike in the moment, but love in the general space of their submission. Power transfer just as you describe.

So yes I'll agree, tickling can fall into the sadistic realms. No argument.

However you'll get a dispute from the romantic ticklers, who approach the fetish from a total different direction. For them I think it's a form of positive attention and communication between Ler and lee. Not about control, but about shared exploration, and focused attention.

Good post!
Myriads

 

[DallasFootTickler]

I agree with MN. There is some element of control involved in the desire to tickle. Whether it be sadistic or not I think depends on the the tickler, however, I've always hypothesized that my own tickling fetish is based on a subconscious level where I feel the need to be dominating since I'm more of a submissive, non-agressive person by nature. I've had my share of self esteem issues and I think that a love for tickling may have arisen from a need to feel like I can overpower someone...not in a nasty way...i.e., I would never wish to harm another person physically, but tickling is a way of getting temporary control of another person in a safe way. I also thrive on other people's reactions... I'm thirsty for attention and for people to react to my actions so that also makes sense in terms of why I would enjoy tickling because (for me anyway) it's based on another person giving me a reaction to my action. If someone is not ticklish, or if a ticklish person can "control" their reaction then there is no arousal on my part since the desired effect did not occur. If someone is not ticklish, then the ability to control their reactions on that level is removed and thus the fesith not satisfied. Okay, I think I'm starting to ramble but I think I've gotten my point across. Again, I agree with MN and I will also support the previous post which tries to take the negative conotation off of the term "sadist". Tickling can be sadistic, but not necessarily in a "bad" or "harmful" way.

-bf2k91

 

[DallasFootTickler]

one more thing...

I should also add that if at any point, the ticklee becomes obviously distressed and serious about wanting the tickling to cease then to continue would be truly harmful and "mean" and more like the way people usually consider the term "sadistic". I own Foot Paradise's non-consentual tickling video and although it was enjoyable at the beginning, by the end I was hoping that it was indeed staged because I started to feel bad for the ticklee who appeared like she felt like she was in real, serious danger. To comment on my previous post, I do believe the fetish arises from a desire to control, but for me, when the ticklee gets really serious and is visually upset and really needs it to stop, then it is no longer fun for either of us and it needs to end right there. It's kind of a fuzzy line that we all as ticklers find ourselves watching out for... At what point have we gone "too far"? Perhaps I have just reinvented the wheel with this post since the concept of "safe words" is already in place for just such a thing...an indicator that the "line is about to be crossed". Anyway, just my 2 cents.

-bf2k91

P.S. Yes I love using "quotation marks". I always imagine that I'm Dr. Evil as I'm typing and making "quotaion marks" with my fingers. 😀

 

[MN Tikl]

Thanks for your input, Bf2k91. I really enjoyed your analysis of what tickling means for you and how it fulfills a need you have. For me, this is the raison d'etre of this forum - opening up to others anonymously (and thus safely) about a topic that is near and dear to all of us, coming to grips with our own unusual (by mainstream society's standards) kink, and bouncing ideas off one another.

Myriads, you are correct in the way I approach the term "sadism". I know what *I* mean when I use the term, but I fully understand why some others here would find it repugnant to be called a sadist. For me, it's like roleplaying. Whether I'm being tickled or tickling another, it's the power exchange of controller/controlled that is appealing.

 

[sushi854]

the ol' consensual/non-consensual debate...

First of all, let say that MN, I agree with your asessment of why people enjoy tickling. From discussions I've had with others, it seems that this fetish manifests itself in slightly different ways in almost everyone, just as there are many other variances in sexual behavior among humans. For me, the idea of the "transfer of power" is what it's all about. One can safely assume from this that my fetish involves tickling that goes beyond the playful stuff. Of course, they would be right. While I enjoy casual or playful tickles, they are not the focus of my fetish and do not excite me sexually. I enjoy the exchange of power, both taking it and relinqishing it. For whatever reason, my fetish is confined to tickling rather than crossing over to other similar behaviors.

As for your opinion on the definition of consent v. non-consent, I'll take the bait and continue the argument. I realize that this definition is a vague one, and if you ask 100 different people you're liable to get 100 different answers. For me, I take the terms literally. As long as a person knows what is going to happen to them once they are tied up and agrees to it nontheless, the situation is consensual. If the person in bondage decides they want out, or the person who put them there starts doing something the other doesn't like or want, the situation can now be defined as non-consensual. Realizing that much of the fiction is non-consensual and that there are many who enjoy non-consensual tickling from the receiving end, I will simply say that it's not something I fantasize about (well,maybe a little) or would ever want to pursue.

Well, thats my input on this subject,
giu

 

[e4b2]

non consentual tickling

In non consentual tickling the ticklee is suffering from being tickled and the tickler is enjoying this.So by the definition of sadism non consentual tickling has to be considered to be sadistic.bf2k91 in the video "non consentual tickling"by foot paradise what is the opinion as to it being staged or not.It appears to be real but there are questions.Would they have risked doing this for real?What if the individual would have been injured such as not being able to breath?Also how could they have known that "Sharon"would accept their money?If it was not staged then "Sharon"could have charged them with assault and she could have gotten money from them also by sueing them.If you look closely when his fingers are tickling her feet they seem to be curled up and sliding thru the air over her feet.
Realticking does have a real non consensual tickle video.You know it is real because the tickling did not last long and also the girl said that she was being hurt and started to cry.Then the other girl stopped and caressed her head.That was not staged.
I just can't believe that footparadise would have taken such a chance in being charged with assault in making such a video.A few minutes yes can be believed but half hour would have been torture and would have been reported to the police.OK they said that money talks but people want to punish someone who tortured them and money would have come anyways through a law suit against them.What do others think about this?

 

[Dave2112]

I totally agree. I have been forever planning a video project that was about a guy making a Non-Consenting tickling video. It would be consentual, of course, but the plot of the film would be this psycho kidnapping and tickling a random person.
Even this is going to be hard to pull off. I wouldn't have the desire, money or balls to try it for real, I'm afraid.
And you are right. "Sharon" could have made a hell of a lot more money by charging them with assault. Not only assault mind you, but wrongful imprisonment. And if the girl was from out-of-state, it would be felony.
Just doesn't add up.

Well...that's my 2 Credits.

 

[Dirkman]

I have been forever planning a video project that was about a guy making a Non-Consenting tickling video. It would be consentual, of course, but the plot of the film would be this psycho kidnapping and tickling a random person.


That sounds awesome. I wish more tickling video companies would do a few videos with plots like that.

Some people may think poorly of what I'm about to say, but i'm just being honest. I like what Foot Paradise did.... I just thought the prostitute Sharon was unattractive, but the vid was one of the best because the nonconsenual plot, whether it was real or staged. If someone else wants to tickle a girl under her will and video tape it, hell, I'll watch it and love it. I just wouldn't do it myself. You can bet if one of the video companies devised a clever way to trick a girl into bondage and tickle her nonconsentually, my check will be in the mail.

I would subgroup nonconsentual into two different scenarios, and they are both sadistic and I like both of them: the first is tying up a victim and tickling them while they react MAD and ANGRY, so they are CURSING and SCREAMING at you, but then they laugh when you tickle them, making them madder. The second would be in a kidnap scenario where the victim is SCARED, SAD, and AFRAID... but they can't help but laugh hysterically even though they are in this situation. These scenarios appeal to me, and apparently to other people. I've read a LOT of stories with these type of scenarios. Yes it is sadistic. But I am not a bad or immoral person.

 

[dodger]

!

Originally posted by Dirkman
I've read a LOT of stories with these type of scenarios. Yes it is sadistic. But I am not a bad or immoral person.

Yes you are immoral! You said you would be happy to see someone else trick/kidnap a girl and torture her against her will with tickling, but that you yourself didn't want to do it (get caught for it is what you mean). That means that you care nothing of the girl's feelings or freedoms. That makes you immoral!
Ha!

 

[talons]

Lighten up Dodger, I think you are loosing your sense of reality dude.😱

 

[dvnc]

non-consentual vs. non-negotiated

I've read this thread, hoping vehemently that those engaging in what's being called "non-consentual" are doing so in negotiated scenes.

In other words, don't try this one at home, kids.

Non-consentual physical contact with anyone beyond your children is illegal. With the kids, sexual contact is illegal. This means that, strictly speaking, truly non-consentual, non-negotiated play is illegal.

Now, if you are playing with someone familiar with the concept of negotiated play and safewords (even if they declare they don't need/want one), then, as long as they allow the scene, it's legal. But then, it's not entirely non-consentual.

Do you want someone that finds this torturous, and responds as such? There are a number of folks in this community already that are into such things. There are more, outside of this community, in the BDSM community, into such things. Stick to partners that are legal, that won't have you arrested for such, and won't have you in a cell with a big guy named "Bubba" who will non-consentually butter you soundly from behind.

FWIW, too, it's well known that there are a great variation on the "rape-fantasy/non-consentual play" interest, country-wide. For those into such, playing within the SM community is very much safer than trying this in the vanilla world, and I hope all here remain safely un-buttered for doing so.

My $0.02,

dvnc

 

[nontkl]

Hey man, can I have the number for that girl who you blew off because she liked to be tickled?

 

[nontkl]

No, but seriously, most tickling that occurs in the whole wide world is nonconsensual-I happen to like both. I DON'T like torturing someone until they cry or piss themselves (I know not everyone here feels the same way-but different strokes for different folks!). But a quick goose to some girly, causing her to squirm away with a flirty giggle is as satisfying to me as tying a girl up and going to town on her vulnerable, sensitive body. And just because someone is nonconsensually tickled doesn't mean they can't enjoy it....AND beg for mercy and struggle and the rest of it. That's probably just the thing they like about it-it makes them feel feminine, vulnerable....a kind of "save me" role they have to play and WANT to play (it's no suprise-and this is not dissimilar to the fact- that many women have rape fantasies for this very reason). I've known at least two girls who enjoy being tickled, and believe me, their reactions would not lead me to believe it unless they had told me themselves..such was their writhing and pleading!!


I'll bet that girl who loved being tickled would have been great! I wonder where she is now....I hope she's getting tickled!

 

[WallStreet]

There's a big difference between "Non consentual with an acquaintance" and "Non consentual with a stranger". They don't even need to be a stranger. I once narrowly avoided trouble after tickling a female co-worker. It was only a quick poke to the ribs, and we were actually friendly with each other, but she did NOT like it when I tickled her and made a point to say it. Looking back in hindsite I could have lost my job.
Before the internet brought tickling into the mainstream I think it's safe to assume that every man with a tickling fetish fantasized about kidnapping a beauty and tickling her. After reading this thread I think there are still alot of people who are fantasizing. There's nothing wrong with that.
My point is this: The Forum contains alot of members who tickle women regularly, but it also contains alot of people who seldom if ever get to tickle women, but they still think about it all the time. Hearing our tales of glory only feeds their fire more. If any of you guys who are itching to tickle someone so bad that you'd actually entertain the idea of kidnapping someone you should first think of this. For a measly couple of hundred bucks you could tickle an escort. Your lawyer fees would be much higher than that if you were being sued for sexual harrasment or molestation, and tickling unfortunately is percieved as exactly that by some.
I'm not insinuating that anyone on this thread is out buying chloroform, I'm just saying that the way I looked at tickling before and then after my first extended tickle session was totally different. It was like I had been to the promised land.
Anyone considering ANY type of Non-consentual tickling should be POSITIVELY sure that the person they're tickling isn't going to sue them.

 

[pantsonfire]

I can personally dig either one, nc tickling is great to fantasize about, but the problem is that the fantasies can't be acted out. Of course "NC" tickling can be gotten away with to an extent, but bondage and NC tickling are really the dangerous mix, because anything else can simply be chalked up to "playing around", but if she's tied up and pleading for you to stop...

Simulated NC experiences are definitely the answer here. Even with consensual tie-up tickling the "victim" still usually pleads for you to stop while you're tickling her. Have you tried just getting off on that?

Shaun

 

[U.N.Owen]

Yep

Pantsonfire wrote, "Even with consensual tie-up tickling the "victim" still usually pleads for you to stop while you're tickling her."

For me, that's the key. People being tickled protest, beg, etc., by reflex. That's part of the fun of it. But that does NOT mean they are in genuine distress. A consentual ticklee will still protest, beg, etc. It's completely automatic.

I mean, look at all the tickling in kids' cartoons. Do you think they mean it to be REAL torture? Of course not. They know that kids enjoy being tickled, within limits; adults, I think, are just the same when their inhibitions and embarrassment at losing control are put aside.

Tickling that actually causes pain to the ticklee is, as far as I'm concerned, totally unappealing. Even in fantasies I have and stories I write in which the girl gets it without asking or agreeing, it is an assumed subtext that she's enjoying it. If it's actual torture, I don't see any fun in it for either party. Likewise, I only like pics and vids in which the girl actually seems to be having fun. Yes, all tickling causes laughter, but there's a difference between entirely forced laughter overlying pain and distress and tickled laughter coupled with a sense of playfulness and fun.

Tickling is of course MOCK sadism: that's part of the game. But REAL sadism has no place in it, for me.

I, for one, could never tickle a girl who genuinely hated it, disappointed though I'd be. I'd be absolutely thrilled to find a girl who said she loved it. And of course, she'd still beg and so on, just like anyone...

That's my two cents.

 

[Dirkman]

Simulated NC experiences are definitely the answer here. Even with consensual tie-up tickling the "victim" still usually pleads for you to stop while you're tickling her. Have you tried just getting off on that?

Shaun

I think that is what needs to be done. It would be cool to see more vid companies do the NC plot themes. Like maybe a Blair Witch style thing from the view point of a kidnapper, watching him kidnap a girl somewhere... the key would be good acting, a really ticklish girl, and not making it cheesy.

As for someone saying that I am immoral since I would be ok with watching a real NON C video, I should have further clerified that it assumed that the girl after the shoot consented or was not harmed or raped or physically abused, the Paradise Vision being an example.

I think many people do not admit that their tickling fantasies mimmick more of the wicked but satisfying stories that are all around (interrogations, kidnappings, etc.) rather then the "lets have a tickle fight and be happy" scenario commonly seen in videos.

Part of the excitement of tickling is the look and pleads of terror mixed with the uncontrolable hysterical bursts of laughter coming from the victim. I'm sorry, but that is the truth for me at least. The closest I've come to seeing this was in an unknown bondage video where the domina improvised by tickling the stocked feet of a sub who lost it, screaming so loud that the audio distorted and the scene cut after about 20 or 30 seconds.

I will once again say that I am not immoral. I've gone a little overboard with some girlfriends, so sue me. I have a fetish. And I LIKE it too, even though with my moral mind, I would never do anything sick to satisfy it, nor do I condone anyone else doing so. But it wouldn't hurt to have some videos that mimmicked the sadistic stories that so many of you all have written.


Dirk

 

[WallStreet]

Highlander

Dirkman-- If you are immoral than beware. Duncan MacCloud is immoral and There Can Be Only One!
Oooops...I was thinking of immortals. Sorry.

 

[DallasFootTickler]

Re: non consentual tickling

I just can't believe that footparadise would have taken such a chance in being charged with assault in making such a video.A few minutes yes can be believed but half hour would have been torture and would have been reported to the police.OK they said that money talks but people want to punish someone who tortured them and money would have come anyways through a law suit against them.What do others think about this?

You make a very good point, e4b2. I'm compelled to agree with you. Foot Paradise's video must have been staged. (Which incidentally makes me feel a lot better). Someone else said "it doesn't add up". Again I agree. Those making the video would have been in some serious sh*t if Sharon ever went to the cops. I can see how they were trying to portray the fantasy by claiming authenticity, but after reading replies to my post I can see how this had to have been staged.

Funny you should mention the fake-looking foot tickling. I buy Foot Paradise's titles because in addition to my tickling fetish I like feet as well and that's what I love to see tickled. Most of their videos have great foot tickling but this one was sorely lacking in closeups and general camera work of the feet in general. Oh well, this is not the section of the TMF for video reviews so I'll leave it at that. But thanks to all who replied to my posts. You all had some great feedback and input on the subject.

- bf2k91 🙂

 

[WallStreet]

I'm glad that bf2k91 and e4b2 are getting along. Now if we could only get 5txw and 7u7vbbS to co-exist.

 

[DallasFootTickler]

😀 LOL WallStreet.

Actually, my name was not chosen at random. Let me break it down:

bf = bare feet
2k = 2000, the year I came up with the name for my hotmail account
91 = 1991 = year I graduated high school.

In retrospect, I'm wondering if I should have chosen an actual nickname instead of something cryptic but I didn't think I'd be posting as much as I have started to do. I could always change and re-register, but now that I've posted a few places I would think people already "know" me and would not realize who I was if I changed screen names at this point.

Anyway, that was pretty funny. 😛

later,
- bf2k91 A.K.A. r2d2_TMF_ub40_tgif69 😀 😀 😀

 

[Dave2112]

Video idea.

To give credit where it is due, I was talking with Morandalis the other day and he had come up with a "Blair Witch" style NC tickling film long before Blair Witch was even a reality. This together with my idea (and many others' I'm sure) of a movie ABOUT a guy doing an NC tickling movie says something about what a lot of us would like to see. If one of you video companies out there is up to the task of finding a good enough actress and really doing it right, you'd probably sell quite a few copies. I know I'd buy it...

Just a thought.