Pain and Sadism

[LD_Tickler]

I get turned off by pain as well, so I think it has to do with the fact that tickling and other forms of BSDM are separate categories. One is about forcing the person into a better mood (tickling is pretty strongly associated with socialization) and the other is about inflicting pain onto someone.

Two completely separate issues, IMHO.

That might be the case for you. But like I've said, I like tickling as a form of torture and a means to inflict suffering. So the idea of forcing the person into a better mood definitely doesn't seem likely for me at least.

 

[solescratcher99]

That might be the case for you. But like I've said, I like tickling as a form of torture and a means to inflict suffering. So the idea of forcing the person into a better mood definitely doesn't seem likely for me at least.

A better mood probably isn't the best way to put it. Its definitely a type of suffering in a way but sadism sort of misses the point too.

 

[Skipadeedoodah]

A better mood probably isn't the best way to put it. Its definitely a type of suffering in a way but sadism sort of misses the point too.

Sadism is deriving pleasure from inflicting suffering. LD derives pleasure from inflicting suffering via tickling. I don't get how sadism misses the point at all.

 

[solescratcher99]

I think we're getting too hung up on definitions but there is a difference between pain (sadism) and suffering. Tickling isn't actually "painful" because its not bringing out negative emotions to make the person suffer but the reverse. Sometimes negative emotions arise but the overall intent is not to make the person suffer with negative feelings and sensations. The intent is to make the person suffer with more "positive" feelings and sensations.

So, there is a fairly big difference, I think. Unless you use some really loosely defined definition of sadism. lol. That's just the way I see it though.

 

[Skipadeedoodah]

I think we're getting too hung up on definitions but there is a difference between pain (sadism) and suffering. Tickling isn't actually "painful" because its not bringing out negative emotions to make the person suffer but the reverse. Sometimes negative emotions arise but the overall intent is not to make the person suffer with negative feelings and sensations. The intent is to make the person suffer with more "positive" feelings and sensations.

So, there is a fairly big difference, I think. Unless you use some really loosely defined definition of sadism. lol. That's just the way I see it though.

Positive and negative are relative terms. Tickling is positive for me and, I assume, you. That doesn't mean it's positive for everyone. My mom, for example, HATES to be tickled. She says that it actually hurts her. I'm the same way with very very cold things. It feels like pain on my skin.

So to say that tickling is inherently positive and the overall intent is to create positive emotions and sensations is inaccurate. LD actually specified that what revs his engine is completely non-consensual tickling of girls who are truly NOT enjoying the sensation. If you don't want to call that sadism, what would you call it?

 

[solescratcher99]

Positive and negative are relative terms. Tickling is positive for me and, I assume, you. That doesn't mean it's positive for everyone. My mom, for example, HATES to be tickled. She says that it actually hurts her. I'm the same way with very very cold things. It feels like pain on my skin.

Everything is relative basically. That doesn't really prove much besides people attach different meanings to similar things. We could also go further with this and even argue that sex can be considered a sadistic act. Then, everyone could fall under the category of sadist. Although that would just be a waste of time.

LD actually specified that what revs his engine is completely non-consensual tickling of girls who are truly NOT enjoying the sensation. If you don't want to call that sadism, what would you call it?

I'd probably just call it non-consensual and suspend my judgement about whether or not its sadistic. At least, until I listen to the other's person's experience of it. Besides, I wasn't talking about how LD likes to see girls tickled. I was talking about me specifically. Tickling a girl who doesn't agree or want to be tickled isn't necessarily sadism though. It might possibly be a mild form of sadism like some stuff that's in really hardcore pornography.

Besides, DSM terminology is really, um... "iffy". lol. I usually try to avoid using their terminology (kind of hard though) because it just doesn't paint an accurate picture of people. Its just a general guideline and not the holy entrails of the chicken.

 

[Skipadeedoodah]

Everything is relative basically. That doesn't really prove much besides people attach different meanings to similar things. We could also go further with this and even argue that sex can be considered a sadistic act. Then, everyone could fall under the category of sadist. Although that would just be a waste of time.

How could you justify calling regular vanilla sex sadistic? Who is getting off on whose suffering? Unless you're talking about when people FIRST start having sex and it's painful for the girl, but I doubt most guys, if any, are getting off on that. It's just an unavoidable unpleasantry that passes in time. Sex, in and of itself, is not unpleasant and no one suffers. I don't get where sadism could come in to play at all.

 

[solescratcher99]

How could you justify calling regular vanilla sex sadistic? Who is getting off on whose suffering? Unless you're talking about when people FIRST start having sex and it's painful for the girl, but I doubt most guys, if any, are getting off on that. It's just an unavoidable unpleasantry that passes in time. Sex, in and of itself, is not unpleasant and no one suffers. I don't get where sadism could come in to play at all.

Along with Psychology I also majored in Philosophy, and I've learned that anyone can argue anything with the right linguistic tools. I'm definitely not going to make the effort to think of some way to do what you're referring to because, as I said, it would be a HUGE waste of time. But, it can be done.

 

[Skipadeedoodah]

Along with Psychology I also majored in Philosophy, and I've learned that anyone can argue anything with the right linguistic tools. I'm definitely not going to make the effort to think of some way to do what you're referring to because, as I said, it would be a HUGE waste of time. But, it can be done.

So..your argument is that you could come up with sufficient evidence to make sex a sadistic act, but you can't figure out exactly how, but you could, because you have the right linguistic tools, but you won't....

That's quite the crappy argument ya got there, buddy.

 

[solescratcher99]

So..your argument is that you could come up with sufficient evidence to make sex a sadistic act, but you can't figure out exactly how, but you could, because you have the right linguistic tools, but you won't....

That's quite the crappy argument ya got there, buddy.

No. I'm just lazy. And arguing is for people who don't know any better. That's why they argue.

 

[Skipadeedoodah]

No. I'm just lazy. And arguing is for people who don't know any better. That's why they argue.

Are you going to make it a habit to use circular logic to help yourself get the last word? Just curious...

 

[solescratcher99]

Are you going to make it a habit to use circular logic to help yourself get the last word? Just curious...

Nope. I'm just being me because me is all I can be. lol.

 

[Skipadeedoodah]

Nope. I'm just being me because me is all I can be. lol.

LOL I give up

 

[Artoo]

I think we're getting too hung up on definitions but there is a difference between pain (sadism) and suffering. Tickling isn't actually "painful" because its not bringing out negative emotions to make the person suffer but the reverse. Sometimes negative emotions arise but the overall intent is not to make the person suffer with negative feelings and sensations. The intent is to make the person suffer with more "positive" feelings and sensations.

So, there is a fairly big difference, I think. Unless you use some really loosely defined definition of sadism. lol. That's just the way I see it though.

Positive schmositive. Some people fucking hate being tickled. Ergo it causes them to suffer when they are put through intense tickle torture.

Physical pain can be sadistic, but not all sadism involves physical pain. I can't see how you haven't grasped that yet. 🙄

 

[starburstz91]

Maybe instead of seeing the victim being tortured, you can see it as to why you like it. Honestly, from knowing you, and based on this thread, you obviously like the control and dominance over others, so, that could be something, maybe? Idk. And then, of course mixed with tickling (a fairly positive action), it's not that complete of a bad and painful thing.

 

[naughtylucy]

It's mainly the sadism aspect of tickling that I like, though in some situations it's less about the mind games and pain (I do find it painful, in a way), and more about the intimacy and communicative aspect.

Having said that, there's a sort of primal communication between a people who are playing sado-masochistic games. I'm into the more commonly acknowledged routes to pain, like whipping and similar, but with tickling it's the lack of injury which makes it more frightening. There's none of the usual physical evidence which indicates (to the ler) that the lee is being hurt. It can go on longer, and can be resumed more quickly.

What tickling and other types of consensual violence have in common is the communication between the people involved.

 

[rhiannon]

Everything is relative basically. That doesn't really prove much besides people attach different meanings to similar things. We could also go further with this and even argue that sex can be considered a sadistic act. Then, everyone could fall under the category of sadist. Although that would just be a waste of time.



I'd probably just call it non-consensual and suspend my judgement about whether or not its sadistic. At least, until I listen to the other's person's experience of it. Besides, I wasn't talking about how LD likes to see girls tickled. I was talking about me specifically. Tickling a girl who doesn't agree or want to be tickled isn't necessarily sadism though. It might possibly be a mild form of sadism like some stuff that's in really hardcore pornography.

Besides, DSM terminology is really, um... "iffy". lol. I usually try to avoid using their terminology (kind of hard though) because it just doesn't paint an accurate picture of people. Its just a general guideline and not the holy entrails of the chicken.

solescratcher, is it possible that you want tickling - and therefore you, who likes it - to be 'normal' and totally vanilla and non-sadistic so bad that you just refuse to agree it can be and in the way we like it often IS a sadistic act?

 

[solescratcher99]

solescratcher, is it possible that you want tickling - and therefore you, who likes it - to be 'normal' and totally vanilla and non-sadistic so bad that you just refuse to agree it can be and in the way we like it often IS a sadistic act?

I never said it couldn't have sadistic themes. I think you're projecting your intentions onto me so you can explain to yourself why I don't subscribe to the narrow, black and white (chocolate and vanilla), way of viewing things.

What I was saying was "sadism" depends on the individual's personal experience with tickling rather than the standard criteria laid out in the DSM or some socially constructed theme of sadism. Also

, ticking and things like BDSM are two different monsters. While tickling can involve sadism, its not always so with everyone and in every circumstance. Unlike something like BDSM where sadism is a necessary requirement in order to engage in the act of BDSM.

So, there's definitely something about tickling which makes it something other than simply another form of sadism.

 

[AngelOfDarkness]

Sadism is about more then enjoying inflicting pain.

It's about enjoying inflicting suffering

In the context of our fetish one can easily be a Sadist, yet still dislike pain and all it's aspects. Sadism has a flexible meaning based upon context. A skilled practitioner of orgasm denial is very much a sadist, as anyone who has experienced such a person's skill and actions will well know. No pain involved.

So the OP can be a sadist that dislikes pain. No issues there.

Myriads

This. EOD.

 

[LD_Tickler]

So, there's definitely something about tickling which makes it something other than simply another form of sadism.

Unless of course, you're one of the people for whom it is a form of BDSM. You think that, even when people engage in tickling as a form of torture, and relish the suffering aspects of it, there's something inherent in tickling itself that makes it less sadistic? That makes very little sense if its indeed what you're saying, given that you've already stated that tickling is what you make it.

 

[rhiannon]

I never said it couldn't have sadistic themes. I think you're projecting your intentions onto me so you can explain to yourself why I don't subscribe to the narrow, black and white (chocolate and vanilla), way of viewing things.

Actually I don't really care why you don't subscribe to any way of viewing things. Your argumentation just sounded very much like you did not want tickling to be sadistic, no matter how.

What I was saying was "sadism" depends on the individual's personal experience with tickling rather than the standard criteria laid out in the DSM or some socially constructed theme of sadism. Also

, ticking and things like BDSM are two different monsters. While tickling can involve sadism, its not always so with everyone and in every circumstance. Unlike something like BDSM where sadism is a necessary requirement in order to engage in the act of BDSM.

Misunderstood you then. Totally agreed.

Unless of course, you're one of the people for whom it is a form of BDSM. You think that, even when people engage in tickling as a form of torture, and relish the suffering aspects of it, there's something inherent in tickling itself that makes it less sadistic? That makes very little sense if its indeed what you're saying, given that you've already stated that tickling is what you make it.

Totally agreed again.

 

[solescratcher99]

You think that, even when people engage in tickling as a form of torture, and relish the suffering aspects of it, there's something inherent in tickling itself that makes it less sadistic?

No, there's something about the tickling 'fetish' itself that is non-sadistic or probably ambiguous. Tickling can have forms of sadism encompassing it but trying to lump all forms of sexual tickling, in all aspects, for all people, in every situation, as a type of sadism is false.

A can be B, but that doesn't necessarily imply that B is A. Sadistic acts can involve tickling (with a sexual theme) but that doesn't mean tickling (as a sexual theme) is inherently a form of sadism. In other words, what you're talking about is more like a subcategory of a "tickle fetish" instead of the "fetish" in itself.

 

[Skipadeedoodah]

No, there's something about the tickling 'fetish' itself that is non-sadistic or probably ambiguous. Tickling can have forms of sadism encompassing it but trying to lump all forms of sexual tickling, in all aspects, for all people, in every situation, as a type of sadism is false.

A can be B, but that doesn't necessarily imply that B is A. Sadistic acts can involve tickling (with a sexual theme) but that doesn't mean tickling (as a sexual theme) is inherently a form of sadism. In other words, what you're talking about is more like a subcategory of a "tickle fetish" instead of the "fetish" in itself.

No one is trying to make the ENTIRE tickling fetish a form of sadism. We're talking about the TYPE of tickling fetish that LD describes, in which the form of tickling that he likes is, in a word, sadistic.

To say the entire tickling fetish is a type of sadism is absolutely ridiculous, and no one has even alluded to that until you did just now.

 

[solescratcher99]

No one is trying to make the ENTIRE tickling fetish a form of sadism. We're talking about the TYPE of tickling fetish that LD describes, in which the form of tickling that he likes is, in a word, sadistic.

To say the entire tickling fetish is a type of sadism is absolutely ridiculous, and no one has even alluded to that until you did just now.

There were two underlying topics that were going on, Skip. One involving LD specifically and one about sadism and tickling. That's what happens in conversations. You talk about one topic and another related one is bound to come up.

For example, I started talking about my view of tickling, then you brought up the fact that your mom hating being tickled, someone else alluded to the fact that some people hate being tickled as well, etc. This furthered the topic of tickling and its relationship to sadism as a whole. The conversation wasn't strictly about LD's personal experience the whole time and involved other people's experience of tickling as well.

 

[rhinoguy]

Share your thoughts with me. I consider myself a sadist. Tickling fantasies for me are best when the lee is an unwilling victim, hates the sensation of tickling, and is being truly tortured. Terror, weakness, and torture.

BUT, I have no stomach for pain. None at all. Even if the bondage looks like it's just uncomfortable and awkward, instant turnoff.

So why is it that I relish fear and suffering, but get all squeamish around pain? Is my empathy broken? Do I have any business classifying myself as sadistic if I can't stand seeing a girl in pain, but love seeing her in ticklish misery and terror?

I am the same way LD. I get sqemish when I see pain inflicted on another person, but love to see them get the living hell tickled out of them. It may be because, though we are somewhat sadistic, we also do not wish to really cause any real permanent hurt to another person. The tickling sensation only lasts as long as a person is getting tickled, and laughter is definitely a better thing to listen to then a person crying or yelling in pain. My thoughts for what they are worth.