onomonopeia
TMF Expert
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2007
- Messages
- 580
- Points
- 0
That lee is gorgeous!
-
If you would like to get your account Verified, read this thread -
The TMF is sponsored by Clips4sale - By supporting them, you're supporting us. -
>>> If you cannot get into your account email me at [email protected] <<<
Don't forget to include your username
The TMF is sponsored by:
sexy cruel F/F
- Thread starter Tickle Abuse
- Start date
Amanda Cortez
2nd Level Orange Feather
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2008
- Messages
- 2,350
- Points
- 38
She's so damn cute and I love it how she tries to curl her toes. Lol, it looks so cute, this girl is really a dream, please more from her
If not a promotional gimmick --- Yeah, it was a bad clip.
Ditto -- But for your take ---
If she knew what she was getting into --- simple fair play ----
Then it still might be torturous ---- but no one would *perhaps be made to feel tricked or misused --- and/or tortured against their will.
Unless you (or the producer) KNOWs the model's agreed and KNOWs she'll enjoy it from permission or admission,
that's an unacceptable tactic.
Consideration for the model shouldn't be too much to ask.
And no I'm not their Union, but clearly this industry needs one
Ditto -- But for your take ---
If she knew what she was getting into --- simple fair play ----
Then it still might be torturous ---- but no one would *perhaps be made to feel tricked or misused --- and/or tortured against their will.
Unless you (or the producer) KNOWs the model's agreed and KNOWs she'll enjoy it from permission or admission,
that's an unacceptable tactic.
Consideration for the model shouldn't be too much to ask.
And no I'm not their Union, but clearly this industry needs one
Last edited:
TicklerGabe
TMF Expert
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2008
- Messages
- 506
- Points
- 0
Really hottt!!!
I give up.Oh will you stop!!! Babbles, for crying out loud, I think Tommy has been in the business long enough to know what he is doing. What should he do? Put up a disclaimer that says "No models were harmed in the making of this clip."? Are you serious Babbles? I mean really.... Give it a freakin break.
Tommy, I thought the clip was fantastic. Once again, you provide all of us great content. I think I'm falling in love with Brooke. She is amazing....
Tommy, I thought the clip was fantastic. Once again, you provide all of us great content. I think I'm falling in love with Brooke. She is amazing....
TicklerGabe
TMF Expert
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2008
- Messages
- 506
- Points
- 0
Great work
Amanda Cortez
2nd Level Orange Feather
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2008
- Messages
- 2,350
- Points
- 38
This clip is really one of your best. I love it when it becomes mean and merciless. You really should do a gang tickling (4 cornered) with her, that would be awsome
Tickle Abuse
Verified
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2007
- Messages
- 11,564
- Points
- 0
Thanks, I think the video is one of my best, one my favs for sure.
tashatickle
TMF Expert
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2009
- Messages
- 301
- Points
- 0
I hope I get a chance at her too!
Yeah, disclaimers would be great. I don't care how fine the print.
Do you know him personally, and can you vouch for him? (Then again I don't know you either). Is he now Infallible? Gimme a break. If he did/arranged this with this other Ler it's not right ---- unless the model did agree.
I don't care how long someone's been in this business, that's no excuse to start tricking models, *IF that's what happened.
At the very least it's irresponsible to market that, even if it didn't go down that way.
Primetime, if that's accurate that's Non-Con torture, abuse, imprisonment with torture, whatever --- not what she agreed to --- Huge difference, all the difference ----
and don't tell me I have to shut up when someone posts "Oh look, this model was tricked into a nasty long severe session she didn't agree to." ----
I've said before there should BE disclaimers (though of course that can abused as well, but not if the model signs an agreement beforehand which fully covers what will be done --- No SURPRISE TORTURE, geez man, what's wrong with you.... ).
If what she agrees to is quite different from what occurs -- "Not cool" doesn't begin to cover it.
This is a business & it should be run responsibly. Which is why, as I stated peacefully, I hope this is a gimmick.
Actually I think there's something very wrong with those who DON'T question.
I find it disturbing you not only DON'T question this but are against free speech & expression in a public thread as well.
Do you know him personally, and can you vouch for him? (Then again I don't know you either). Is he now Infallible? Gimme a break. If he did/arranged this with this other Ler it's not right ---- unless the model did agree.
I don't care how long someone's been in this business, that's no excuse to start tricking models, *IF that's what happened.
At the very least it's irresponsible to market that, even if it didn't go down that way.
Primetime, if that's accurate that's Non-Con torture, abuse, imprisonment with torture, whatever --- not what she agreed to --- Huge difference, all the difference ----
and don't tell me I have to shut up when someone posts "Oh look, this model was tricked into a nasty long severe session she didn't agree to." ----
I've said before there should BE disclaimers (though of course that can abused as well, but not if the model signs an agreement beforehand which fully covers what will be done --- No SURPRISE TORTURE, geez man, what's wrong with you....
). If what she agrees to is quite different from what occurs -- "Not cool" doesn't begin to cover it.
This is a business & it should be run responsibly. Which is why, as I stated peacefully, I hope this is a gimmick.
Actually I think there's something very wrong with those who DON'T question.
I find it disturbing you not only DON'T question this but are against free speech & expression in a public thread as well.
Last edited:
FeatherJedi
3rd Level Red Feather
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2001
- Messages
- 1,597
- Points
- 38
if you dont like the stuff then dont watch it babbles
i believe everyone here knows it is a gimmick because tickle abuse is a respectable long run site so stop bitching when you dont know what is really going on in terms of contracts and such
i believe everyone here knows it is a gimmick because tickle abuse is a respectable long run site so stop bitching when you dont know what is really going on in terms of contracts and such
You've seen the contract & talked to the model then. That's great.
If I'm "bitching" then you're being a complacent sheep
because who cares, after all, if a model gets tortured FAR more than agreed if she can be persuaded to go along with it afterward,
as long as the viewers are happy (I'll leave it at that)
and the producer makes additional profits for the (extreme) "element of surprise..." right?
----You really *know for certain it's a gimmick?
I suspect it is, hope it is, as I stated --- but he describes this as "almost non-con" which also gives the impression
he thinks this seemingly gross abuse of agreement might be considered acceptable ---- just a (huge) stretching of the original agreement
--- even if the end result is severe torture and the model agreed to a normal or mild session.
-----Those are two very different animals!!!
But that's exactly the problem I described --- I don't know, we don't know what the contract was here,
I don't know if she came back because it was a gimmick or because he paid her off ---
it should be clear models are NOT abused,
and not TO BE abused.
You guys tell me I'm "bitching" --- Hardly. You "gents" are being impolite when I presented an obvious & valid argument ---- and then you get threads like --- the CURRENT one:
"Why is it So Hard to Meet a Damn Girl On Here?"
*
If I'm "bitching" then you're being a complacent sheep
because who cares, after all, if a model gets tortured FAR more than agreed if she can be persuaded to go along with it afterward,
as long as the viewers are happy (I'll leave it at that)
and the producer makes additional profits for the (extreme) "element of surprise..." right?
----You really *know for certain it's a gimmick?
I suspect it is, hope it is, as I stated --- but he describes this as "almost non-con" which also gives the impression
he thinks this seemingly gross abuse of agreement might be considered acceptable ---- just a (huge) stretching of the original agreement
--- even if the end result is severe torture and the model agreed to a normal or mild session.
-----Those are two very different animals!!!
But that's exactly the problem I described --- I don't know, we don't know what the contract was here,
I don't know if she came back because it was a gimmick or because he paid her off ---
it should be clear models are NOT abused,
and not TO BE abused.
You guys tell me I'm "bitching" --- Hardly. You "gents" are being impolite when I presented an obvious & valid argument ---- and then you get threads like --- the CURRENT one:
"Why is it So Hard to Meet a Damn Girl On Here?"
*
Darkknight
Verified
- Joined
- May 2, 2001
- Messages
- 3,864
- Points
- 38
I'm with you on that Tidas.
Hot clip TA, this post got buy me and buried, so first time looking at it.
Brooke is right there behind the legendary Priscella as a tickler.
DK
If I'm "bitching" then you're being a complacent sheep
because who cares, after all, if a model gets tortured FAR more than agreed if she can be persuaded to go along with it afterward,
as long as the viewers are happy (I'll leave it at that)
and the producer makes additional profits for the (extreme) "element of surprise..." right?
----You really *know for certain it's a gimmick?
I suspect it is, hope it is, as I stated --- but he describes this as "almost non-con" which also gives the impression
he thinks this seemingly gross abuse of agreement might be considered acceptable ---- just a (huge) stretching of the original agreement
--- even if the end result is severe torture and the model agreed to a normal or mild session.
-----Those are two very different animals!!!
But that's exactly the problem I described --- I don't know, we don't know what the contract was here,
I don't know if she came back because it was a gimmick or because he paid her off ---
it should be clear models are NOT abused,
and not TO BE abused.
You guys tell me I'm "bitching" --- Hardly. You "gents" are being impolite when I presented an obvious & valid argument ---- and then you get threads like --- the CURRENT one:
"Why is it So Hard to Meet a Damn Girl On Here?"
*
Babbles, either Tommy's selling evidence that a pretty serious crime was committed here, or he's selling a really hot fantasy.
My guess is that it's the fantasy, for a few reasons: He's in this for the long term, so it's not in his interest to commit crimes that antagonize models and risk getting him shut down. On the other hand, there's a strong financial incentive to make this a very hot fantasy.
So in the absence of any hard evidence of a crime, I'm going with fantasy. Okay, so maybe you think I'm a gullible fool who's thinking with his little head. Could be. (It sure wouldn't be the first time.) But in that case, why are you wasting your time here? I mean, you suspect this is evidence of a sexual assault, and the proper response is to leap into action and...start a forum flame war??
If you falsely accuse me, you're the only one flaming.
Nice try, DaBunny.
I already answered this. (And people wonder why I repeat myself... )
I made a reasonable statement responding to a Non-Con situation described here as "almost non-consensual" ----- but it describes much more than what the model was expecting, so it simply would be -- Non-Con.
Regardless, it's phrased like there is a chance this producer thinks he can get away with it legally since she agreed to SOME tickling and got SEVERE tickling/torture, again. I've said repeatedly I also suspect it's clever marketing but it's not responsible either way.
Great for fantasy ---- Yes, that's fine. I've often said I empathize there. But this is TOTALLY irresponsible in terms of promoting abuse, which I've also said before.
Then a couple of individuals throw insults at me for politely questioning what's written out point blank, and *I'm the one starting a flame war?
----Not quite.
You guys are making statements which are out of line --- that was yours.
Don't falsely accuse me of making a false accusation or starting a flame war when I'm questioning
what is clearly written by the producer himself in a public forum.
If you want "hard evidence of a crime" --- You see his admission, in print,
clear as day.
Where else do you see "hard evidence?"
There is none other --- that's the problem.
*Except for what looks like the abuse itself, just as described... backing up the admission, if accurate.
So I go with the evidence of abuse since that's greater than the mere assumption he's bluffing.
Someone posts "look here, I"m getting away with 'almost' (in effect) Non-Con, ha ha I found a new loophole" --- and no one questions it? Yeah, that is disgraceful.
And the only person who gets pounded is the one who questions the obvious potential for real abuse.
I got feedback from viewers who felt it looked like she was really tortured ---
I hope it's good acting, something she agreed to when fully informed,
but I'm not taking the chance of paying for real abuse.
Unfortunately a lot of folks here look & literally even ask for just that so I don't doubt he's raking it in --- I just hope, not at her expense, or any other woman's.
The "hard evidence" (I can see the jokes coming...) is the clearly stated irresponsible advertising/statement asserting abuse
----- more so & far better would be an exit interview with a model who was supposedly abused badly. At least a disclaimer so as to at least discourage real abuse. There's a reason why that exists for animal "actors..."
Once again -I share the fantasy --- but not at anyone else's expense ----
there needs to be SOME assurance models are not abused,
whether outright or via creative loopholes, semantics & variations on a "contractual" theme.
I hope I'm not "wasting my time" if producers eventually add disclaimers --- and/or just quit abusing/torturing mislead women, IF they are, for risky hot "One Time" profits.
There are also other ways to go about getting the Non-Con effect --- Including fully informed models losing bets,
Tickle Roulette, whatever ---- or claim whatever you want but have that statement in the finest print so as to preserve the fantasy; no one was tricked, mislead or abused in any way.
*
Nice try, DaBunny.
I already answered this. (And people wonder why I repeat myself...
)I made a reasonable statement responding to a Non-Con situation described here as "almost non-consensual" ----- but it describes much more than what the model was expecting, so it simply would be -- Non-Con.
Regardless, it's phrased like there is a chance this producer thinks he can get away with it legally since she agreed to SOME tickling and got SEVERE tickling/torture, again. I've said repeatedly I also suspect it's clever marketing but it's not responsible either way.
Great for fantasy ---- Yes, that's fine. I've often said I empathize there. But this is TOTALLY irresponsible in terms of promoting abuse, which I've also said before.
Then a couple of individuals throw insults at me for politely questioning what's written out point blank, and *I'm the one starting a flame war?
----Not quite.
You guys are making statements which are out of line --- that was yours.
Don't falsely accuse me of making a false accusation or starting a flame war when I'm questioning
what is clearly written by the producer himself in a public forum.
If you want "hard evidence of a crime" --- You see his admission, in print,
clear as day.
Where else do you see "hard evidence?"There is none other --- that's the problem.
*Except for what looks like the abuse itself, just as described... backing up the admission, if accurate.
So I go with the evidence of abuse since that's greater than the mere assumption he's bluffing.
Someone posts "look here, I"m getting away with 'almost' (in effect) Non-Con, ha ha I found a new loophole" --- and no one questions it?
Yeah, that is disgraceful. And the only person who gets pounded is the one who questions the obvious potential for real abuse.
I got feedback from viewers who felt it looked like she was really tortured ---
I hope it's good acting, something she agreed to when fully informed,
but I'm not taking the chance of paying for real abuse.
Unfortunately a lot of folks here look & literally even ask for just that so I don't doubt he's raking it in --- I just hope, not at her expense, or any other woman's.
The "hard evidence" (I can see the jokes coming...) is the clearly stated irresponsible advertising/statement asserting abuse
----- more so & far better would be an exit interview with a model who was supposedly abused badly. At least a disclaimer so as to at least discourage real abuse. There's a reason why that exists for animal "actors..."
Once again -I share the fantasy --- but not at anyone else's expense ----
there needs to be SOME assurance models are not abused,
whether outright or via creative loopholes, semantics & variations on a "contractual" theme.
I hope I'm not "wasting my time" if producers eventually add disclaimers --- and/or just quit abusing/torturing mislead women, IF they are, for risky hot "One Time" profits.
There are also other ways to go about getting the Non-Con effect --- Including fully informed models losing bets,
Tickle Roulette, whatever ---- or claim whatever you want but have that statement in the finest print so as to preserve the fantasy; no one was tricked, mislead or abused in any way.
*
Last edited:
The Morals Police
I see the Morals Police has expanded its beat to the Video/Audio Clips section. When one has a solution in search of a problem, no one is spared:
The morals police, they post on the T.M.F.,
The morals police, they almost scare me to death,
The morals police, they're coming to upset me, oh no
You know they talk in Greek,
And those comments ain't bright,
And when they fall asleep,
Those big mouths are still open wide, so wide
'Cause they're killing the fun,
They're killing the fun,
Ev'ry single thread they just whine and complain,
Those comments so inane
The morals police, they post on the T.M.F.,
The morals police, they almost bore me to death,
The morals police, they're coming to upset me, oh no
Well, they have not learned,
To read between the lines,
Because they can't discern,
With heads up their behinds, behinds, behinds
'Cause they're waiting to pounce,
They're waiting to pounce,
Ev'ry single thread they just whine and complain,
Those comments so inane
We want to post,
They're like a ghost,
They won't leave us alone
They don't get paid to log off the web,
Or leave us alone
They just destroy,
Kill all the joy,
They won't let us alone
They persecute us,
They're the judge and jury, and no fun
'Cause they're killing the fun,
They're killing the fun,
Ev'ry single thread they just whine and complain,
Those comments so inane
The morals police, they post on the T.M.F.,
The morals police, they almost scare me to death,
The morals police, they're coming to upset me, oh no
__________________
I see the Morals Police has expanded its beat to the Video/Audio Clips section. When one has a solution in search of a problem, no one is spared:
The morals police, they post on the T.M.F.,
The morals police, they almost scare me to death,
The morals police, they're coming to upset me, oh no
You know they talk in Greek,
And those comments ain't bright,
And when they fall asleep,
Those big mouths are still open wide, so wide
'Cause they're killing the fun,
They're killing the fun,
Ev'ry single thread they just whine and complain,
Those comments so inane
The morals police, they post on the T.M.F.,
The morals police, they almost bore me to death,
The morals police, they're coming to upset me, oh no
Well, they have not learned,
To read between the lines,
Because they can't discern,
With heads up their behinds, behinds, behinds
'Cause they're waiting to pounce,
They're waiting to pounce,
Ev'ry single thread they just whine and complain,
Those comments so inane
We want to post,
They're like a ghost,
They won't leave us alone
They don't get paid to log off the web,
Or leave us alone
They just destroy,
Kill all the joy,
They won't let us alone
They persecute us,
They're the judge and jury, and no fun
'Cause they're killing the fun,
They're killing the fun,
Ev'ry single thread they just whine and complain,
Those comments so inane
The morals police, they post on the T.M.F.,
The morals police, they almost scare me to death,
The morals police, they're coming to upset me, oh no
__________________
Oh geez, the same oozing bandaid...
(I'm not quoting THAT half-page monstrosity.... )
I'm not sure if that Musical Miscarriage is more "immoral" because it's an overused Acme Bullies' Fix-All Flamer
<a href="http://www.glitter-graphics.com"><img src="http://dl10.glitter-graphics.net/pub/246/246300mhwc7t01bz.jpg" width=212 height=286 border=0></a>
or because the copyright holder/s to the original song would be seriously tempted to strangle you slowly if they happened to stumble across it in any of the 7-12 threads you've gleefully trolled it in.
Try to have a wonderful abuse-free day.
*
(I'm not quoting THAT half-page monstrosity....
)I'm not sure if that Musical Miscarriage is more "immoral" because it's an overused Acme Bullies' Fix-All Flamer
<a href="http://www.glitter-graphics.com"><img src="http://dl10.glitter-graphics.net/pub/246/246300mhwc7t01bz.jpg" width=212 height=286 border=0></a>
or because the copyright holder/s to the original song would be seriously tempted to strangle you slowly if they happened to stumble across it in any of the 7-12 threads you've gleefully trolled it in.
Try to have a wonderful abuse-free day.
*
CrystalLight
Level of Raspberry Feather
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2008
- Messages
- 15,941
- Points
- 0
I swear to god I think you search "non con" just to come into threads and blow them up with your bullshit commentary.
Models have to sign R.E.L.E.A.S.E.S. If they don't, then no filmy. As one person previously mentioned; Tommy's been in the business long enough that I think he knows what the fuck he's doing.
It's been about a year, Babbles, why don't you just start another non-con thread in TK or Gen Dis so everyone can collectively come together and tell you to pop another xanax and worry about the trees.
Models have to sign R.E.L.E.A.S.E.S. If they don't, then no filmy. As one person previously mentioned; Tommy's been in the business long enough that I think he knows what the fuck he's doing.
It's been about a year, Babbles, why don't you just start another non-con thread in TK or Gen Dis so everyone can collectively come together and tell you to pop another xanax and worry about the trees.
The latest photo alone makes your comments worth reviewing, CrystalLight
And your response to the Chief of Morals Police makes me think I am going to wake up and see this is just a nice dream. (Reminds me of a Cheap Trick song, "The Dream Police.")
The Morals Police make you wish someone with something more constructive to say would post more often - Neutron, are you still out there?
And your response to the Chief of Morals Police makes me think I am going to wake up and see this is just a nice dream. (Reminds me of a Cheap Trick song, "The Dream Police.")
The Morals Police make you wish someone with something more constructive to say would post more often - Neutron, are you still out there?
goddess_nemesis
Verified
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2001
- Messages
- 42,925
- Points
- 36
Babbles, it's called advertisement. Tickle Abuse is selling a clip so he's going to do what he can to get people interested. He's building up a fantasy. If he honestly lied to Kali (the lee) that Brooke (the ler) was not going to stop torturing her, then he's one fucked up producer and would be sued to kingdom come.
The models in every video clip that we see has to sign a release forum. If the model doesn't sign it, then the shoot doesn't take place. It's to protect both the model and the producer. The models know exactly what's going to happen.
BTW, to the OP, awesome clip.
