Really Non-consensual Tickling ---

[Redmage]

but i will say i am shocked that prostitutes are hired and then tickled without mercy and have no resources to go for help because of what they do for a living. is this true??????

Well, whether or not it's true is the question on the table right now. It is certainly true that if something is done to a hooker against her will, she doesn't have as much recourse as another woman might. But whether this specific thing is being done is unlikely in my opinion.

 

[FrenzyTickles]

Denial or apathy....

Redmage,
My beef is not with the "least likely possibility," as you also conveniently phrase it, but with the apparently MOST likely DOCUMENTED possibility ---- If it LOOKS like assault, and ACTS like assault, and is DESCRIBED as an assault, (in great detail)
I have to assume it IS ASSAULT. ------ Not a "waste of energy" AT ALL to be SURE this is not the case.

That's how it's being sold. And that ALONE is a huge offense, promoting the torture of women either way.
The ADVERTISEMENT ITSELF OF REAL TORTURE (real or not) is an intolerable offense because it condones & promotes it, if not ACTUALLY DOING IT....
The fact it's a prostitute in one video just makes it EVEN MORE LIKELY it's real.

I get the impression most guys here just don't want to bother doing the right thing, just want to have fun at someone else's enormous expense, keep on getting cheap thrills watching what could VERY WELL BE REAL torture videos, AS THAT'S HOW THEY'RE ADVERTISED,
& the hell with the suffering victim.

Venray,
I certainly don't believe everything I see, of COURSE there are all sorts of manipulations & cheap tricks in video and in written statements, they MIGHT be lying
----but what if they're NOT????? ---- You people are actively supporting torture.

so it's just as likely if not more that YOU also just want to use the excuse I'm supposedly "advertising" to *ignore the very real possiblity -- the MORE LIKELY possibility --- that real torture is being imposed upon women, filmed & sold.

I brought it up in the subsection specific to it, video paysite review, and here, where ---
OK, Yes, maybe I AM advertising HOPING LAW ENFORCEMENT WILL SPOT THIS and not the average drooling neanderthal.

 

[asutickler]

Oh, and it appears, thanks to the very gracious Isabeau, that others, notably a "wendynpeter" and an "asutickler" among others share my view ----

How in the hell did I get dragged into this? Do I know you?

To clarify my "view":


Paradise Vision's purported non-con videos were faked, and badly faked at that. Their "Tickleslaves" brand pissed me off considerably... But only because they sent unsolicited snail-mail fetish advertisements to the home addresses of people who had purchased Paradise Vision videos in the past. I would never do business with either company, but only because of their apparent habit of crapping on the privacy of their customers. No company in America is going to be able to make the number of non-consensual videos that Paradise Vision and Tickleslaves have claimed to put out and still remain in business. In America, one couldn't get by with physically assaulting someone while videotaping and then selling (on the internet, no less) the evidence of their crime. It would be exceptionally easy for one of their former models to turn around and have them jailed were this the case. Nonetheless, the fact that many people purchase these videos specifically because they actually BELIEVE that they are non-consensual is disgusting, to say the least... Even though nothing non-consensual is actually going on.

The Southeast Asian MTS videos, on the other hand, are different. They are intentionally filmed in an area of the world where human rights are not stringently enforced. When a producer does such things and then brags that his videos are non-consensual, one really has to wonder. I'm sure that my posts in regards to this producer are what you're referring to above.

I know Venray - but I think its really some concerned members doing this - if tickle torture upsets them, then they should watch tamer videos - I have no idea what happened to south east asian tickling videos - I think the producer got so upset with the crap some of these people threw at him, he simply took his clips and left - too bad, though - he had some great videos.

Yes... And maybe he's in jail in Bangkok or something.

Good riddance in either case.

 

[FrenzyTickles]

No, asutickler, you don't know me, sorry for "dragging you in," but it appeared, and still does, that you're equally disgusted with what appears to be & is advertised as Non-Consensual torture.

If you say Paradise Vision & Tickle Slaves is likely full of it, that's also some consolation, but that was only the first advertisement I saw, and the description nauseated me.

As I said I find the advertisement ALONE offensive & dangerous. If there's ANY CHANCE they've done that AT ALL -- I haven't seen it, how can YOU even be sure it's not real??? --- Consequences CAN BE evaded in this country as well ---- they "only" post a handful of N/C videos, perhaps all they knew for certain they could get away with......

I think they should either post proof they haven't committed crimes, AND an apology, and if not,
just for PROMOTING TORTURE,

----they should be annihilated.

Calm enough?

I posted here since it seems it's actually happening, whether here or in poor countries where women are third class citizens -- (until it was brought up to me I wasn't aware of your previous posting, and then I couldn't resist referring to it) I don't care WHERE ----
it's just obviously unacceptable & needs to be rooted out, hopefully with the perpetrators screaming louder than their victims.

 

[sovryticklish]

Trust

I know i dont post very often, my scheduale makes it difficult to keep up with whats going on in this forum. I am in arizona on layover and thought i would take a peek at whats going on in the " tickling world". For me tickling is a very intense and very personal thing, if someone were to trick me into being tied up and tickled against my will i would be very VERY! angry!! yes i love being tickled and yes i consider it fun and exciting yet if it was a situation where i were tricked and had no controll over where or how much i was being tickled or when it would stop i am sure i would have to report that person to the police...

And i dont care how much money they tried to give me after the fact, it is all in trust..if i am in an intimate situation with someone and they betray my trust i would definately feel like i was vilolated..

I am sure that these videos are not truly non-consensual,, probably just a advertising scheme to sell videos,, i can see where someone would be excited by the thought of tickling someone like that in a fantasy scenario..I myself have even thought about those types of fantasies,, but its a different thing entirely where a person is lied to and taken advantage of...

just my thoughts,,

 

[FrenzyTickles]

sovryticklish

Thank you SVT - a truly comforting posting.

I'd myself either get them indicted or maimed, preferably both.

 

[drew70]

If I were kidnapped and tickle tortured by women nonconsensually, this would be like a fantasy come true for me. But this isn't to suggest women should feel this way. It's just how I feel. Personally I couldn't bring myself to tickle torture a woman unless I knew she wanted it.

 

[TickledToDeath]

IT's ALL an ACT man, an ACT! Cause and Effect! Visual and fantasy candy!

 

[Battousai]

Some people might like damsel (or guys) in distress stories. This doesn't necessarily mean they're going to go out and kidnap someone. It's like saying people who play violent video games are automatically going to go out and kill someone. There's a difference between fantasy and reality. But people have already mentioned that in this thread, so I doubt my opinion will make a difference.

 

[Tickler Bart]

After reading all of the posts on this subject, I feel I should respond.
In my own humble opinion . . .
I do NOT like non-consensual stories or videos, faked or not.
If the ticklee does not like or want to be tickled, then it ruins it for me.
The biggest turn-on for me is when the ticklee actually LIKES being tickled.

The very THOUGHT of someone being tied & tickled against their will is not something I particularly enjoy.
Yes, there are stories out there about someone being captured, tied & tickle tortured against their will (More than likely ALL or most of them are), I always think that the ticklees secretly LOVE it & want more, even though most of the stories written do not convey this. This is my way of making it okay for the story to be enjoyable for me.

I think that the reason for the outrage is NOT that there are so-called non-consensual videos out there. It's the fact that someone had this thought in their head and produced it for profit.
It's not the point if these videos are faked or not. It's the CONTENT it represents that is in question.

THIS is the real issue.

 

[SweetestSounds]

Basically irreconcilable premises

Very interesting to read the exchanges & see what's essentially unresolvable.

Correct assumption #1 (I think we'd all agree):
Non-Con is a relatively dominant theme in a lot of tickling literature, both erotic and non.

#2:
Seeing it on the page and then either loving it or turning away in disgust is a lot less visceral than seeing a video representation of it.

#3:
FrenzyTickles' view is that even if *1* of these videos is the real thing, the tickling community should be repulsed and outraged (I agree, by the way).

#4:
RedMage(& I use his moniker only because his replies were articulate and the most comprehensive, I thought) & others' position is that this particular fantasy is so part & parcel of tickling fantasies that it's downright bland. Hence, any video being made to meet this kitchen-garden variety need is pretty mainstream (as mainstream as any fetish video co can be) and therefore *not* engaging in any true torture because of the constraints, legal and moral (admittedly the latter is less compelling than the former).

FrenzyTickles: This is assault!
RM & Oth: It's not assault. It's make-believe assault.
FrenzyTickles: Doesn't matter, it's being marketed as torture. Suppose it is?
RM& Oth: So highly unlikely as to be irrelevant.
FT: Oh, so the low probability of it actually happening makes it ok?


I understand her position and also his. If there was a market (please understand that I am not drawing any true parallels) for videos of animal torture and an actual body of companies producing such videos, all marketing would be geared to convince the viewer that is real. The actual sight of poor cats and dogs and hamsters or whatever on film being tortured would make a lot of people very distressed and feel very uneasy that 1) people might actually want to see this and 2) that perhaps somewhere, sometime, a company was actually doing this, filming it, and not faking it.

Ok, so most of the market, buyers and sellers would hate the actual idea that the creature on film was actually suffering, but know that it's just a thought and a visual representation of that thought being done convincingly. Still, a whole bunch of people would worry about the poor little critters and wonder what kind of sleazebag would actually *market* something like that and hope to god that it never actually happened in reality.

 

[Battousai]

FrenzyTickles: This is assault!
RM & Oth: It's not assault. It's make-believe assault.
FrenzyTickles: Doesn't matter, it's being marketed as torture. Suppose it is?
RM& Oth: So highly unlikely as to be irrelevant.
FT: Oh, so the low probability of it actually happening makes it ok?

This really is becoming a debate as old as time itself.

I personally agree with RM. If you start saying that 'make-believe assault' is wrong, then what about, say, horror movies? "Oh, we can't show that. It has make-believe murder, which is wrong." "We can't release this video game, you're supposed to shoot people in it."

In my opinion, condemning fantasy videos is like saying people should go to jail for killing video game characters.

I'm sure pretty much everyone would agree that if a video depicted a real non-con scene it would be a violation of the ticklee’s rights, and totally unmoral on the part of the creator. But come on, you can't punish someone for creating a fake fantasy... That's like the Christians trying to ban Harry Potter for containing witchcraft.

 

[Redmage]

Redmage,
My beef is not with the "least likely possibility," as you also conveniently phrase it, but with the apparently MOST likely DOCUMENTED possibility ---- If it LOOKS like assault, and ACTS like assault, and is DESCRIBED as an assault, (in great detail)
I have to assume it IS ASSAULT. ------ Not a "waste of energy" AT ALL to be SURE this is not the case.

No, you don't HAVE to make that assumption, FT. There is no law, either statutory or moral, that says you must, any more than you have to assume that Jody Foster was actually gang-raped in "The Accused." It was very realistic, and the summary description of the movie says clearly "a woman is raped in a bar...," but it would be crazy to suppose that's what actually happened.

That's how it's being sold. And that ALONE is a huge offense, promoting the torture of women either way.

Only if people believe the hype. If it's recognized as a video fantasy, then it's no more promoting the torture of women than a bondage website is. Keeping the difference between fantasy and reality clearly in mind is key.

The fact it's a prostitute in one video just makes it EVEN MORE LIKELY it's real.

You mean the fact that she's advertised as being a prostitute. Again, she may or may not be. So since that's no more certain than any of the rest of it, it doesn't really have any bearing on the likelihood of the whole scenario.

I get the impression most guys here just don't want to bother doing the right thing, just want to have fun at someone else's enormous expense, keep on getting cheap thrills watching what could VERY WELL BE REAL torture videos

No. Again, you are judging the people who bought those videos based on your own personal set of assumptions about how likely they are to be real.

That likelihood matters, because despite your insistence on certainty, certainty simply isn't available here. Neither you nor I can be absolutely sure which of us is right, so we have to decide what to believe based on other factors. I rely on what seems to me to be the most likely scenario: that a company that specialized in video fantasies made another one. You rely on what seems to me to be the least likely scenario, for reasons that I really can't understand. You say you "have to" take it as real, but I just can't see anything that forces you to do that.

 

[FrenzyTickles]

Old as time, definitely. We're the cruelest creatures in existance.

Battousai,

There is obviously no parallel with a *CLEARLY FICTIONALl horror movie.

---Much less VIDEO GAME CHARACTERS???? --- These are REAL WOMEN
REAL VIDEOS ----- **HOW** do you see a parallel here?

Or are you again purposely attempting to trivialize CASUALLY ACCEPTED ASSAULT - TORTURE caught on film in order to make it even MORE casually acceptable??

---You call this a "fantasy." There's a huge difference between watching what is clearly FICTIONAL BUT CONVINCING, with yes, very sensitive but willing models, and what is graphically described as REAL TORTURE.

What would be more similar are other assault videos, depicting rapes, even "snuff" films
---THOSE are parallel, as the same question arises --- Do you tolerate the POSSIBILITY, which is being PACKAGED AS REALITY and is therefore INDISTINGUISHABLE????

--- my POINT is, THERE IS NO WAY TO TELL THE DIFFERENCE.
SOME IF NOT ALL may be real. And it doesn't matter to most of you.


Tickler Bart, Thank you for your empathy & thoughtful reply -- But it is the reality, or the real possibility of someone having been tortured, and/or paving the way for it to happen (again... and again...) which is the problem. I'm not happy about the "intent," but if they at least keep that to fantasy & UNQUESTIONABLY willing participants I'll gladly shut up.

Redmage,

If certainty is not possible, they should not exist. For all the above reasons, and then again, the promotion of torture.
Not everyone distinguishes, as you say.

 

[Battousai]

Okay, what you're saying is that you're outraged over the videos that have women bound and tickle tortured. But even if it is 'real torture caught on film', they're consenting adults. It's not against their will. Even if they decided afterwards that they didn't want the video to be released, it wouldn't be released. Legal action could be taken if it was. In my opinion, it is no different to a movie. Actors may get hurt doing stunts, or have to do some pretty physically challenging things, but it's their choice.

I'm sorry, but I'm just not going to be outraged over consenting women being tickle tortured on tape. I'm not trying to trivialize torture, but you can't tell someone who wants to be tortured that they can't be, because it opens doors and makes torturing other people okay. That's just silly.

 

[Battousai]

I just decided to add this. You seem to be totally against torture being accepted, portrayed, sold, whatever. But to me, being tortured and pushed to my limits is one of my favorite things. Because of this we're never going to see eye to eye. Please understand that I have nothing against you, but we're just not goint to agree. I'll probably leave it at that.

 

[FrenzyTickles]

The point is they're NOT consenting.

Thank you for trying to explain your perspective, I do appreciate that,
by my entire argument, and the title of this thread, has to do with the
*Non-Consensual --- and therefore real torture
of those duped into a nasty situation, forced to endure inhuman agonies for who knows how long

and then asked, "Oh, will you sign?" And maybe they add... "Or I'll do it again...." or "I won't release you...." or who knows what else.

My problem is these (expletive) "videographers" do NOT get CONSENT BEFORE they torture. At least that's what they go to GREAT LENGTHS to portray, with long lurid descriptions & apparently horrific video footage.

As Tickling Paradise says, the prostitute was *chosen for her NEGATIVE reaction, tortured, and THEN asked for consent. They also say the video is "not for the weak of heart." ---- Inhumane & unacceptable.

I entered here because I'm fascinated by tickling, and I can appreciate (or tolerate) a "fantasy," even those I find disgusting ----
But NOT something which is CLEARLY stated to be NON-CONSENSUAL,
and/or as I said, allows for MORE torture & assault, EVEN if they're lying to make profits. We don't know what's real and what's not. I have been given NO guarantees this was faked/consensual, because there are none.

 

[Battousai]

Thank you for trying to explain your perspective, I do appreciate that,
by my entire argument, and the title of this thread, has to do with the
*Non-Consensual --- and therefore real torture
of those duped into a nasty situation, forced to endure inhuman agonies for who knows how long

and then asked, "Oh, will you sign?" And maybe they add... "Or I'll do it again...." or "I won't release you...." or who knows what else.

My problem is these (expletive) "videographers" do NOT get CONSENT BEFORE they torture. At least that's what they go to GREAT LENGTHS to portray, with long lurid descriptions & apparently horrific video footage.

As Tickling Paradise says, the prostitute was *chosen for her NEGATIVE reaction, tortured, and THEN asked for consent. They also say the video is "not for the weak of heart." ---- Inhumane & unacceptable.

I entered here because I'm fascinated by tickling, and I can appreciate (or tolerate) a "fantasy," even those I find disgusting ----
But NOT something which is CLEARLY stated to be NON-CONSENSUAL,
and/or as I said, allows for MORE torture & assault, EVEN if they're lying to make profits. We don't know what's real and what's not. I have been given NO guarantees this was faked/consensual, because there are none.

Hm, I see. I can argee with you at least on the fact that it's wrong to torture someone and then threaten them into agreeing to it or something. I've never heard of videos claiming such things, but I don't really look into the videos much. I still doubt these videos are actually non-consensual, as that would pretty much be illegal... But I don't have any evidence for or against such a statement.

So long as something like that is fictional, though, even if it's marketted to appear real, I'm probably not against it.

By the way, would you mind providing a link to the description of one of these videos? I'm interested in seeing for myself now.

 

[Redmage]

If certainty is not possible, they should not exist. For all the above reasons, and then again, the promotion of torture.

We live in an uncertain world. As I said, you cannot be certain that any erotica you see was not coerced in some way.

There are very few things that one can be sure of. That's just something that reasonable people have to reach an accomodation with.

 

[jim66e]

Battousai,

There is obviously no parallel with a *CLEARLY FICTIONALl horror movie.

The thing is, while you say that the horror movie is clearly fictional, most people here would say that the tickling video is equally clearly fictional. I would hypothosise that if you took someone who had never seen a movie and had no expereince of them and showed them both a modern, realisitc horror movie and a so called non consentual tickling video, the person would consider them equally real. But as you said, the movie is clearly fictional, and the tickling video as well.

 

[The Last Laugh]

My problem is these (expletive) "videographers" do NOT get CONSENT BEFORE they torture.

How would you know?

At least that's what they go to GREAT LENGTHS to portray, with long lurid descriptions & apparently horrific video footage.

Well, yeah. That's what they claim. But it doesn't make it real. In all likeliness, it's just some kind of publicity stunt. I can't say that I approve, as it's dishonest towards the customers, and it gives the illusion of something very unethical indeed. But it's still fake.

As Tickling Paradise says, the prostitute was *chosen for her NEGATIVE reaction, tortured, and THEN asked for consent.

I seriously doubt that's true. Again, just a publicity ploy.

We don't know what's real and what's not.

That's true, we don't know for sure. But it doesn't mean that the chances of it being real are very high at all. It also doesn't give you the right to insult the entire community, basically calling most ticklephiles a bunch of sadistic, depraved perverts.

 

[isabeau]

as i have said before, i myself cannot judge because i havent had an opportunity to watch these clips or videos. however i will admit that i like the non-consensual tickle torture stories. does that make me sick? i enjoy the stories such as the nylon dungeons and i pmd the author once and he pmd me back saying he was surprised that a woman would enjoy those stories. i like the kidnapping scenarios where the female is made a tickle slave. does this make me a prevert? do i think i myself would enjoy such a scenario? probably not in reality. as the stories, i do believe that the videos are also made to enhance a fantasy. i seriously doubt that those people would do it in actuality...

isabeau

 

[Ticklerguy4u]

as i have said before, i myself cannot judge because i havent had an opportunity to watch these clips or videos. however i will admit that i like the non-consensual tickle torture stories. does that make me sick? i enjoy the stories such as the nylon dungeons and i pmd the author once and he pmd me back saying he was surprised that a woman would enjoy those stories. i like the kidnapping scenarios where the female is made a tickle slave. does this make me a prevert? do i think i myself would enjoy such a scenario? probably not in reality. as the stories, i do believe that the videos are also made to enhance a fantasy. i seriously doubt that those people would do it in actuality...

isabeau

I agree isabeau, I like Star Wars movies but would never use my jedi powers for the dark side.

 

[OBleedingMe]

This is no "witch hunt" by any means --- HOW is it *I'M under fire for PROTESTING ASSAULT & TORTURE????? I'm QUITE liberal & openminded, thank you,

Give me at least five minutes with any of these inbred jackals, and I'll show you I have no regard for anyone's opinion of my "sensitivity."

IF THEY TORTURED SOMEONE they deserve the same treatment. Or at least a new orifice somewhere at their victim(s') discretion.

Yes, I'm Female --- and Pissed beyond description though not reason thank you very much. 😡

Simply WITH ZERO TOLERANCE FOR ASSAULT OR TORTURE ---- EVEN THE APPEARANCE IN PROMOTION OF IT.
You'd never believe I'm normally a quiet pacifist.

As an active member of the BDSM community, I feel I have to speak out. By you making that statement, you've just condemned an entire sexuality to extinction. BDSM ALWAYS portrays scenes of torture/torment.

FrenyTickler, you're being a real hypocrit here. You claim to be open-minded, yet (by your own admission) you seek to wipe fantasies sexual torture or torment off the face of the Earth. You claim to be a pacifist, but in the same breath, you advocate the torture of people you BELIEVE tortured others. Wow, remind me to run the other way if you ever become a judge. Sorry, sweetheart, it doesn't work that way. If ya want to be a pacifist, you have to be against all forms of violence, from the war against the Nazis to self-defense. You're not a pacifist. You just like to call yourself that to feel better about yourself and establish an air of moral superiority over your detractors.

What I think is happening here is that there is a severe lack of understanding on your part, FrenzyTickler. You really have no concept of the world of bondage, D/s, or BDSM. You have no concept of the Top/bottom dynamic. You do not have an understanding of the Master/Mistress slave relationship. You don't understand how a person can willing consent to a particular torment even though she or he does not want to undergo it, much less understand how it turns this person on to undergo such a torment. Let me try to explain.

Like it or not, there are people out there who fantasize about torturing or tormenting another person for sexual gratification. They enjoy controlling another person. They are called Sadomacochists. Conversely, there are people out there who fantasize about being tortured or tormented for sexual gratification. They enjoy being controlled. They are called masochists. The sort of fantasies/torments this group of people enjoy run the gambit from light bondage to heavy pain. And yes, a popular fantasy is non-consensuality.

Look, I could see you being outraged if the bottom in the video went to the police, sued the producers, and people here still bought the video. But that hasn't happened, so there are two distinct possibilities here:

1. The video was FAKE. It was a FANTASY.

2. The bottom was paid well enough that she felt the torment she endured was worth the pay.

I do have a question for you, though: if you're against any sort of torture/torment on film, why aren't you protesting over at the many BDSM forums/BDSM websites? They routinely portray scenes of electric play (torment with electric shocks), bastinado, forced enemas (usually with irritating substances, lol), severe whippings/canings/spankings to the point of bleeding, breasts/labia lips being nailed to boards, pins being driven into testicles, and even fire play. It's all consensual, even if the bottom dislikes the torment she/he is going through, but still - it's a dipiction of torture, so it should be wiped off the face of the Earth, right?

I think a quote from Bill Mahr (sp??) is apporpriate here: "I don't legislate TASTE."

Neither should you, Frenzytickler. There's no victim, there's no court proceding against Paradise Vision, let it go. There are millions of people in this country who have fantasies involving non-consensual situations. There are millions more who have fantasies of being the VICTIM in these non-consensual situations. Nothing you can say or do will ever change that.

 

[FrenzyTickles]

KEY WORD(s) *NON*CONSENSUAL - AND *REALLY* (!!)

OBleedingMe,
You obviously haven't read everything I've written, not that I'd expect anyone to at this point, as I've written (& repeated) muuuuuuch more than intended or wanted.
*TRust me I wish it wasn't made necessary by the unwillingness you people assume is consent if asked afterwards.

Granted, I may be stretching the definition of "pacifist," but I'm no hypocrite thank you, as you YOURSELF QUOTED, I said "normally."

I probably could've - equally accurately - used the adjective "pacifistic" rather than the more absolute-sounding noun form of "pacifist" --- But either way, I wrote in a *qualification for my usage of the term.
Obviously a TRUE pacifist wouldn't be interested in TRUE poetic justice (a torture for a torture)
to EFFECTIVELY DETER the slimeballs of the world.
BUT I'm against capital punishment (or torture, etc., EVEN in these cases in reality) since there is --- MY POINT ---- NO WAY TO BE SURE actual NONCONSENSUAL torture occurred.

However, if I was the victim of torture, as I have been to only a slight extent (MORE than enough) I'd want to beat the crap out of them. So fine, OTHERWISE i'm PACIFIS*TIC. Qualification, with adjective.

I certainly DID NOT *CONDEMN the entire BDSM world, as you state ---
I AM EQUALLY HORRIFIED by WHATEVER APPEARS *TRULY* NON-CONSENSUAL
in any "pervert's" world, whether *mine, or *yours, or both. Though I don't like BDSM I HAVE NOWHERE stated that innate urge is any less natural.

And some of you wonder why I rant in bold.

You people (tickling, BDSM, WHOEVER) have either missed or are trying to avoid the clearly stated point --- IF TORTURE IS REALISTICALLY ADVERTISED AS *TRULY* NON-CONSENSUAL IN *ANY SITE *ANYWHERE -- but I saw it here, so here I rant --- IT'S UNACCEPTABLE. ****IF**** IT ISN'T REAL, IT OPENS THE DOOR FOR THE REALITY.

If your BDSM "SLAVES" ARE WILLINGLY ENSLAVED (oxymoron but accurate) and FULLY INFORMED, AND HAVE CONSENTED
THEY DON'T BELONG IN THIS THREAD -----!!!!!!