so, is the tmf considered a porn site?

[wendynpeter]

That is and has been my point. Content and context!

OK, but that's not my point ... lol

My point is that there is a viable definition of "pornography," which is "sexually explicit material." Of course semantics come into play, because I guess you could argue that Playboy isn't sexually explicit, or that the Victoria's Secret catalog is. You can't argue with that. But you can say that that would not be the view of a reasonable person who reflects our current cultural norms.

Isabeau's husband does reflect such a reasonable person's view of TMF. He has no stake in believing that the primary purpose for the site's existence is to share adult fetish material, but it's completely obvious to him when he sees the site and what's being shared that it is.

But again, SO WHAT? I have no problem at all with pornography per se - perhaps because I have no problem with my own sexuality. Lots of pornography is perfectly healthy adult sexual material. Some of it is not as ... well... let's say "sophisticated" ... as some other, but that's about taste.

 

[laughinggaszone]

So I guess the Victorias Secret Catalog is a porn catalog/publication if someone gets off on it then?

I don't think so...lol.

Porn is content of said vid or publication or website and the intent thereof.

Gray area calling TMF porn.

TTD

I think the point is that there is material intended for porngraphic use and then there is material that was not created for that purpose but is used for that purpose. A person who collects Victoria Secret catalogs for the purpose of deriving sexual stimulation is using them as his own pornography. For the person who just collects them as someone might collect stamps or comic books they are not pornography. The whole notion of content is just a narrow way of defining something so it can be categorized and regulated.
webmaster joe

 

[drew70]

This is one of those issues that comes around every so often. Although there is some clearly pornographic content, I don't think it's what the TMF is about. One idea I can't buy into is this idea that certain material is normal until it falls into the hands of certain people, then it magically transforms into porn. For example, I've heard it said that a children's clothing catalogue is porn in the hands of a pedophile. I couldn't disagree more, because you've now made pornographers out of innocent marketers of children's clothing. Just because some twisted individual flogs his log over it doesn't incriminate the material itself.

Same applies to tickling material of the sort in which there is no nudity or tickling of genitalia. Judge the material by it's content, not by who pops a boner over it.

 

[WorkInProgress]

I actually consider this to be a matter of semantic hair-splitting.

TMF, it should be remembered, is divided into sections. This section, and many of the others, are what I call a discussion site. As for the stories, well, that's really a matter of what definition you want to use. Tickling stories, as I understand them, are written for the purpose of getting the reader turned on. Now obviously, none of us here are going to call that obscenity, but if one wants to call it pornography in the non-pejorative sense, then have at it. Or, if one wants a term that's more clearly non-pejorative, there's erotica, as some have suggested. But really, it's more a question of how you want to define pornography than of how you want to describe TMF, because TMF is what it is, and what it is is a lot of things, including discussion, and also including titillation.

 

[laughinggaszone]

One idea I can't buy into is this idea that certain material is normal until it falls into the hands of certain people, then it magically transforms into porn. For example, I've heard it said that a children's clothing catalogue is porn in the hands of a pedophile. I couldn't disagree more, because you've now made pornographers out of innocent marketers of children's clothing.

That is certainly my opinion. However, I don't hold the creators of the material responsible for what someone does with it (in the case of your example, a pedophile) anymore than I hold McDonalds responsible for obesity. Pornography was not the intended purpose of a children's catalogue. It's an inanimate object that can be used for it's intended purpose or it can be used for something completely different. Many things in the world came into being intended as one thing and have been used for something entirely different. It's like art, which is never truely complete until it is viewed, read or listened to. The artist may have had a particular meaning or message he or she wished to convey, but that may be very different from what the various readers, viewers and listeners come away with. This is something important, because art is one of the many things that shape our world, our conception of it and the decisions we make in it. This is why it's very subjective to individual interpretation and why the pedophile looks at the children's catalogue as the average man looks at a penthouse magazine. It is an irrefutable fact. So, on a personal level, it is that person's pornography, but to a non pedophile, it's just a catalogue. This doesn't mean we ban children's catalogues or tolerate pedophile's using them as pornography. It simply means we should recognise that what one person may see one way, another may see in a completely different way. Even the legal definition of obscenity has change and will change by the dictates of the ever evolving tastes and mores of society. Nothing is static.
webmaster joe

 

[Soda83pop]

(Being asked to no one in particular) Is this an honest question, or just an attempt to relieve any guilt you feel for being associated with what someone else considers a "porn" site?

I mean, it is what it is. There are parts of this place that aren't pornographic, and frankly, there are parts of it that are. If telling yourself the entire site isnt pornographic at all helps you sleep at night or makes your relationship with someone easier, then by all means, rock on. But lets face facts.

The top banner has naked women tied up and being tickled. The left banner features links to more of the same...including a link to TicklingParadise.com which is a porn site. That makes portions of it porn.

There are forums here where people morph into political scientists, tell jokes, play word games, and have enjoyable banter....that is clearly not pornographic.

Im getting the impression that for some reason the term "pornographic" being used to describe the TMF makes some people uncomfortable, or that they feel the TMF is above the term "pornographic." Im surprised, considering the number of people that are members here (contributing members at that) who make their livelihood from pornography. I would really like to see them chime in on this and how it makes them feel.

Just because there arent a gaggle of naked dicks or money shots doesnt mean the place isnt partially pornographic. But as already noted:

So the TMF may be pornographic to some. Not to others.

One of the results of having 40,000 registered members...we all see things differently.

 

[Eternal Tomboy]

If you think porn is nothing more than those awful vanilla fuckfests, then no, TMF isn't a porn site.

LMAO... too funny. I've gotta find a way to work the descriptive "vanilla fuckfest" into a conversation somewhere.

As for my opinion on the topic, I'd have to say that the TMF is borderline in the pornography department. We may not be splashing around and submerged up to our necks in graphic porn material, but we've definitely got both feet in the pool. Some of the artwork, pictures, fiction/true tickling stories, and threads in the tickling discussion are certainly geared to sexually excite and arouse the reader. I'm not saying ALL, but unargueably SOME. When there is intent on both the poster and the reader to derive sexual gratification, it kinda sounds like porn to me. Even going by "vanilla" definitions, right there under neath the TMF header is a bunch of naked women in bondage.... certainly nothing you'd see in a PG movie 😉

Now, are we all porn all the time? Certainly not. We've got a lot of areas that deal in world issues, religion, and many other topics which have nothing to do with adult subject matter. I think that's what makes us well-rounded, different, and interesting. I mean, where else can you read erotic tickling tales AND the latest news in foreign policy? 😀 But just because we've got areas that deal with world events and religion, doesn't mean that we don't also have areas that should have a XXX rating.

Just my 2 cents...
Maggie