Tickling: Nature vs. Nurture

[conan2995]

Hey all! I was reflecting the other day on the origins of my interest in both tickling and feet. My pondering left me just as clueless as when I started.

Being a medical student and a one-man Geek Squad, I often think of things in a scientific way. Of course, that means I have to address the done-to-death "Nature vs. Nurture" debate.

Are our inclinations towards tickling due to a genetic factor that predisposes us to enjoying the act of tickling? Is there a slight difference in our brain function or anatomy that allows us to derive greater pleasure from that stimulating touch?

OR is our preference for tickling based on learned experiences: watching and sharing in tickling with our parents, siblings and friends and somehow deriving a deeper meaning from those experiences?

If you've ever watched your parents enjoy tickling each other, did you derive that same preference by inheriting their genes or by learning from them?

I'll be honest, with most psychological elements the reality is usually a combination of both nature and nurture. What do you think? What are the origins of your love for tickling?

 

[LD_Tickler]

You should take a look back through this discussion forum (even as recently as about a week ago). This is probably one of the top three most repeated topics.

Many people here believe in some kind of "hard-wire" configuration of their minds, that they were born with a tickling fetish, or at least, born with some kind of biological predisposition towards it. When asked why, a very common defence is "because I've liked tickling as long as I can remember."

I reject that view and that explanation, as "as far back" as people remember often isn't as far, or as clear, as they think. I believe it's a developmental psych thing, based on associations and experiences.

 

[Skipadeedoodah]

I use the term "hard-wired" simply to express that it's been a part of me for as long as I can remember. Some people have a specific experience or time in their life when they can say they "realized" they were into tickling. I can't. If it is something that developed from experiences, they were experiences I had so long ago that I can't remember them or the time before them when tickling didn't mean a little something extra to me.

Is it really a genetic predisposition? Who knows. My dad seems to enjoy tickling. My mom isn't much of a fan. My sister likes being tickled, and my brother doesn't seem to affected one way or the other. I like it now 😀 That's all I'm really concerned with.

 

[Ticklish9's]

Many people here believe in some kind of "hard-wire" configuration of their minds, that they were born with a tickling fetish, or at least, born with some kind of biological predisposition towards it. When asked why, a very common defence is "because I've liked tickling as long as I can remember."

I reject that view and that explanation, as "as far back" as people remember often isn't as far, or as clear, as they think. I believe it's a developmental psych thing, based on associations and experiences.

I think your argument is reasonable, but I nonetheless maintain a "hardwired" belief. First off, because of comparisons to other fetishes that are much less likely to have arisen in day to day life during childhood - or, for that matter, to homosexuality, itself generally accepted as being (largely) hard-wired. Sexual preference simply appears to be built in, though certainly modifiable to an extent.

And second, because I grew up in a pretty much tickle-free family (indeed almost entirely contact-free). I was never particularly comfortable with most types of human contact because of this, until recently (now I'm a cuddle fiend thanks to Em) but tickling was a very present desire from day one. And that has not been modified at all since then.

 

[ElFewja]

I don't think a hardwired stance for anything makes a large amount of sense, as knowledge and experience are not things that one is born with per-say. Perhaps our mind begins registering things far earlier than we believe, so that we carry memories from within the womb, but I dunno; it seems too perfect to say that someone was something from birth or before as it relies upon an understanding of things/acts that should otherwise be impossible to know; it presumes that, in this case, tickling is a universal; that no matter the circumstances, tickling would exist regardless of our race/gender/etc., or anything else; that we would understand the world in it's entirety before experiencing it.

Rather, I think we are more predisposed to fall into a certain trend; that is to say that due to some sort of anomaly, we find certain traits more attractive than others, so that it evolves into an attraction towards tickling, bondage, etc.

I could also be entirely wrong.

Etc~

 

[love feet]

I use the term "hard-wired" simply to express that it's been a part of me for as long as I can remember. Some people have a specific experience or time in their life when they can say they "realized" they were into tickling. I can't. If it is something that developed from experiences, they were experiences I had so long ago that I can't remember them or the time before them when tickling didn't mean a little something extra to me.

Is it really a genetic predisposition? Who knows. My dad seems to enjoy tickling. My mom isn't much of a fan. My sister likes being tickled, and my brother doesn't seem to affected one way or the other. I like it now 😀 That's all I'm really concerned with.

that is what i think to
Most people just find out that they like it!!!.

 

[Maestro1874]

You should take a look back through this discussion forum (even as recently as about a week ago). This is probably one of the top three most repeated topics.

Many people here believe in some kind of "hard-wire" configuration of their minds, that they were born with a tickling fetish, or at least, born with some kind of biological predisposition towards it. When asked why, a very common defence is "because I've liked tickling as long as I can remember."

I reject that view and that explanation, as "as far back" as people remember often isn't as far, or as clear, as they think. I believe it's a developmental psych thing, based on associations and experiences.

If you are a one man geek squad then your Best Buy must not be very busy.

Note: Should have been tied to the original thread.

 

[LD_Tickler]

I think your argument is reasonable, but I nonetheless maintain a "hardwired" belief. First off, because of comparisons to other fetishes that are much less likely to have arisen in day to day life during childhood - or, for that matter, to homosexuality, itself generally accepted as being (largely) hard-wired. Sexual preference simply appears to be built in, though certainly modifiable to an extent.

I don't know of any fetishes whose likelihood of developing in childhood one can shrug off as unlikely.

I also think that homo/hetero/bisexuality are so distinct from fetishes that their development can't shed much light on a fetish discussion.

And second, because I grew up in a pretty much tickle-free family (indeed almost entirely contact-free). I was never particularly comfortable with most types of human contact because of this, until recently (now I'm a cuddle fiend thanks to Em) but tickling was a very present desire from day one. And that has not been modified at all since then.

You don't see how that story itself could support a developmental psych perspective?

 

[Artoo]

Nurture.

 

[Ticklish9's]

I don't know of any fetishes whose likelihood of developing in childhood one can shrug off as unlikely.

I also think that homo/hetero/bisexuality are so distinct from fetishes that their development can't shed much light on a fetish discussion.

I don't think they are that distinct. When did I choose to be straight? Well, I never did (and to be honest I would have made a bitchin' gay guy). When did I choose to love being tickled? I never did. I just always have. It seems very related. I'm essentially uninterested in "normal" sexuality. I'm not just regular straight, I'm interested in girls with cute feet and tickly hands. It all ties together.

You don't see how that story itself could support a developmental psych perspective?

I absolutely do, which is why I included the bit about cuddling. My human contact issues have been totally resolved by nurture, but my tickling interest is literally EXACTLY the same as it was when I was like 5. Back then I'd have a crush on a girl with cute feet and want her to tickle me, now I'm getting married to a girl with super cute feet and want her to tickle me (and she does). It's the exact same, whereas the rest changed. Is this conclusive? No. But it lends enough weight for me to feel the way I feel re: nature vs nurture.

I definitely could be wrong, I've been wrong before and will be again, that's just how it seems to me. 🙂

 

[c7_assassin]

When you get down to it, at a certain point in our brain chemistry nurture becomes nature, and at the social level nature becomes nurture. So you're pretty much chasing your tail asking that question.

 

[LD_Tickler]

I don't think they are that distinct. When did I choose to be straight? Well, I never did (and to be honest I would have made a bitchin' gay guy). When did I choose to love being tickled? I never did. I just always have. It seems very related. I'm essentially uninterested in "normal" sexuality. I'm not just regular straight, I'm interested in girls with cute feet and tickly hands. It all ties together.

The psychological/experiential development of a fetish doesn't involve choice. I really don't see your point, I'm sorry to say.

I also never chose to get a concussion, but that happened. Is getting a concussion a fetish?

They only "seem" related, I'm willing to bet, because they both have to do with how you experience sexuality. I don't buy that homo/bisexuality is a fetish.

 

[Ticklish9's]

The psychological/experiential development of a fetish doesn't involve choice. I really don't see your point, I'm sorry to say.

I also never chose to get a concussion, but that happened. Is getting a concussion a fetish?

They only "seem" related, I'm willing to bet, because they both have to do with how you experience sexuality. I don't buy that homo/bisexuality is a fetish.

I'm saying that "fetish" is not a very good word to describe any aspect of sexuality. There are certain things that turn me on, and certain things that don't. Homo/heterosexuality represents an aspect of that, as does tickling and so on. I'm not certain why heterosexuality or homosexuality would arbitrarily fall into a different category - it all has to do with what an individual finds arousing.

 

[LD_Tickler]

I'm saying that "fetish" is not a very good word to describe any aspect of sexuality. There are certain things that turn me on, and certain things that don't. Homo/heterosexuality represents an aspect of that, as does tickling and so on. I'm not certain why heterosexuality or homosexuality would arbitrarily fall into a different category - it all has to do with what an individual finds arousing.

I think there's a difference both functionally and psychologically.

Functionally, it's a matter of magnitude. Which sex you're attracted to will envelop, and preempt, all other considerations. Think about it. A person is homosexual, with a foot fetish (for example). They are not footsexual. Nearly everyone has sexuality, while comparatively few have fetishes. That alone is enough to make me think there's a qualititative difference in what the two things are.

Psychologically I think there's a difference in that I believe sexuality is a function of brain composition, at least indirectly, where a fetish is a matter of development and experience, which can affect anyone.

 

[RosieCreek]

Pinpointing the moment

A few years ago, my sister asked me about childhood memories of tickling. We were both tickle tortured by the same older (by 7-8 years) brother. My sister told me that all through grade school, she was afraid to raise her hand to answer a question because it was so terrifying to expose her armpits in any way. She had nightmares about it well into adulthood, and said she would rather be hit in the face with a brick than be tickled. I was tortured as well, and hated that feeling of powerlessness, secrecy, understanding that someone was using my body to take care of his own needs etc. I can almost pinpoint for myself that moment I developed my fetish, though....during one of those torturous episodes, there was a stroke that was ALMOST ticklish, I knew how ticklish it was going to be again in another second, and that very night I tried to duplicate it using the arm of my stuffed doll. Thoughts of tickling consumed about 90% of my attention from then on, as they may have done with my sister. I wish we hadn't kept our secrets for so long.

 

[Ticklish9's]

I think there's a difference both functionally and psychologically.

Functionally, it's a matter of magnitude. Which sex you're attracted to will envelop, and preempt, all other considerations. Think about it. A person is homosexual, with a foot fetish (for example). They are not footsexual. Nearly everyone has sexuality, while comparatively few have fetishes. That alone is enough to make me think there's a qualititative difference in what the two things are.

Psychologically I think there's a difference in that I believe sexuality is a function of brain composition, at least indirectly, where a fetish is a matter of development and experience, which can affect anyone.

Hmmm. I can see your point, and I'm certainly no expert on human sexuality, so I can't claim authority here. But my impression is that fetishes are A) not as uncommon as you may think and B) not that different from "normal" sexual attraction. You might say that most men have a boob fetish, though that's considered perfectly normal. For that matter, think of how it is considered a matter of common acceptance that men are going to want to have their wives or girlfriends allow them to perform anal sex once in a while. That's a fetish in my book - I've never once even dreamed of wanting to do that - but it's part of the mainstream spectrum of sexual behaviour, if just outside of straight vanilla. We just like what we like, and what arouses us is what arouses - whether it be a particular type or shape of girl or boy or a specific action or, more likely, a wide variety of the above.