-
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:
Tickling the Motel Maid
- Thread starter flecke
- Start date
Eternal Tomboy
TMF Master
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2001
- Messages
- 980
- Points
- 18
Okay... I'm not sure how to put this constructively.....
Making ANY physical advances on a girl so drunk that she can barely walk up a flight of stairs is wrong. I mean, it's not like you guys are long-time buddies, and she passed out at your house after a party and you were just playfully trying to tickle her awake. You were at your place of business, you are mere aquaintances with this girl, and she was so drunk that she didn't even wake up while you cut off her socks and apparently tickled her long enough to go through several of your "tickle tools". What would you have done if she DID wake up? How the hell do you explain your "tickle kit" to her? Even coming from a tickle lover's perspective, I've gotta say that I would have FREAKED out if I was her.
I'm sorry, but this whole scenario gets a HUGE "ten" on the creepiness scale for me. I'm kind of hoping that this was one of those stories that was a fantasy that you tried to pass off as a real tickling story... but if not, may I suggest that you refrain from any second attempts at tickling any unconscious girls at your workplace? Most, if not all, girls (even ones here on the TMF) would see this as a huge violation. I'm honestly just trying to help here....
Making ANY physical advances on a girl so drunk that she can barely walk up a flight of stairs is wrong. I mean, it's not like you guys are long-time buddies, and she passed out at your house after a party and you were just playfully trying to tickle her awake. You were at your place of business, you are mere aquaintances with this girl, and she was so drunk that she didn't even wake up while you cut off her socks and apparently tickled her long enough to go through several of your "tickle tools". What would you have done if she DID wake up? How the hell do you explain your "tickle kit" to her? Even coming from a tickle lover's perspective, I've gotta say that I would have FREAKED out if I was her.
I'm sorry, but this whole scenario gets a HUGE "ten" on the creepiness scale for me. I'm kind of hoping that this was one of those stories that was a fantasy that you tried to pass off as a real tickling story... but if not, may I suggest that you refrain from any second attempts at tickling any unconscious girls at your workplace? Most, if not all, girls (even ones here on the TMF) would see this as a huge violation. I'm honestly just trying to help here....
Hotels do make intresting places for tickle fun. I worked at one once too. There was a very attractive sandy brown haired girl "Amy" she always dressed up extra nice on the weekends. She was covering for another girl so she was working a double shift. She had kicked off her high heels and was sitting on her lower legs with her feet facing behind her. I had went to check a burnt out light. I asked if there was a duster as I figured I'd clean the light...after fixing the light I noticed amy was daydreaming so I used the duster to tickle both feet. She let out a good laugh and wiggled her feet which became stuck in the back of the chair. So then I dropped the duster and used my fingers to torture her poor feet til she begged to go to the bath room. She ran to the bathroom can back and handed me her left leg and said do more. we did off an on all night as there where no customers.
Eternal Tomboy
TMF Master
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2001
- Messages
- 980
- Points
- 18
First, by posting your story here on the TMF, you are indirectly asking for my opinion along with all the other 80,000 members here - which is what makes it an open forum. If you're going to post here, you have to be prepared for both positive AND negative feedback - just stands to reason that your story will provoke both responses given the large member numbers and wide range of tastes. Take it from someone who's posted a few tales of her own... you can't please everyone, all the time.
I know you don't know anything about me (nor after this little encounter would you probably want to), but I'm not the kind of girl who gets off on belittling people or flaming the boards for no apparent reason. In that respect, I am the Mary Poppins of the TMF - it takes quite a bit to get a rise out of me.
But your story *as you initially presented it* actually made me cringe. I was very uncomfortable with the scenario you described, and felt compelled to say something. HOWEVER, had you added the VERY important details of your long-standing relationship with this girl, your numerous previous tickle encounters with her, or her expressed consent to tickle her while she was sleeping if the opportunity presented itself (which is what you noted in your PM) then your story would have taken on an entirely different tone. I don't consider details THAT intricate to the story to be "boring lead ups".
I'm not saying you have to be as long-winded as me (which was one of the negative comments I heard a lot about MY stories when I posted), but setting the stage a bit has the power to change a creepy story into a playful one. Had you done that, you probably wouldn't have heard from me at all.
Maggie
paracarl44
Wielder of 100 Feathers
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2007
- Messages
- 130,118
- Points
- 0
TICKLING IS TICKLING!
So the lady got a little drunk and got tickled, who cares.
So the lady got a little drunk and got tickled, who cares.
Last edited:
BellybTickler
4th Level Orange Feather
- Joined
- May 2, 2002
- Messages
- 2,962
- Points
- 36
So the lady got a little drunk and got tickled, who cares.
I agree, tickling is a playful encounter and that is what occurred
awesome experience, be sure to let us know if you do any more with her Helloooo, tickling a drunk is not "playful" without full consent.
It's simply totally irresponsible to post a story in the "true tickle tales" section regarding the apparent tickling ---
or sexual assault, as it would have been
upon someone who was not in their right mind and/or had not given consent to be tickled under those circumstances while IN their right mind ----
---without also noting you *DID in fact HAVE THAT FULLY INFORMED CONSENT already established.
BIG HUGE FREAKIN' difference.
Thankfully people like Daisycrazy will add her "2ce" to say, hey, that's wrong, that's not acceptable, you don't tickle/torture/take advantage of/inappropriately touch a drunk!
And thankfully (apparently) that's not what you actually did, to your credit ----
But you needed to give that information first so this was not a
"look how I took advantage of a drunk woman in real life" story
promoting real abuse.
Those who said it's no big deal, "only tickling,"
either haven't been tortured by it, because they're not sensitive themselves,
and/or SHOULD NOT BE PLAYING with anyone who is ---
until they learn the basic decency of FULLY INFORMED consent.
As opposed to "Half-Baked Consent" Nuhhh-Uhhhh.
The only "troll" would be the guy taking advantage of the drunk,
not the person who tells the creep to get the #@*! off her since she's not sober.
It's simply totally irresponsible to post a story in the "true tickle tales" section regarding the apparent tickling ---
or sexual assault, as it would have been
upon someone who was not in their right mind and/or had not given consent to be tickled under those circumstances while IN their right mind -------without also noting you *DID in fact HAVE THAT FULLY INFORMED CONSENT already established.
BIG HUGE FREAKIN' difference.
Thankfully people like Daisycrazy will add her "2ce" to say, hey, that's wrong, that's not acceptable, you don't tickle/torture/take advantage of/inappropriately touch a drunk!
And thankfully (apparently) that's not what you actually did, to your credit
---- But you needed to give that information first so this was not a
"look how I took advantage of a drunk woman in real life" story
promoting real abuse.
Those who said it's no big deal, "only tickling,"
either haven't been tortured by it, because they're not sensitive themselves, and/or SHOULD NOT BE PLAYING with anyone who is ---
until they learn the basic decency of FULLY INFORMED consent.
As opposed to "Half-Baked Consent"
Nuhhh-Uhhhh.The only "troll" would be the guy taking advantage of the drunk,
not the person who tells the creep to get the #@*! off her since she's not sober.
BellybTickler
4th Level Orange Feather
- Joined
- May 2, 2002
- Messages
- 2,962
- Points
- 36
Those who said it's no big deal, "only tickling,"
until they learn the basic decency of FULLY INFORMED consent.
Please do not insult me . . . you know nothing about who I am, I'm a very respectable, decent gentleman . . . the military taught me that . . . you've the right to constructively criticize the object of dicussion, not personally throw insults and put-downs or be so blatantly ignorant towards those who do reply to threads.Reacting to 2 irresponsible statements.
And you should have considered that advice yourself before making a blanket statement that tickling is playful,
and agreeing with someone who doesn't care if the ticklee is drunk. (!!)
I should ask you, please do not promote assault or agree with those who do.
Tickling is *not always playful by far, as anyone on this forum should know or figure out relatively quickly,
and there is *no way tickling someone who's not firmly in command of their own mind or body is even close to acceptable
unless they've given permission while fully sensible, and then I'd still hesitate.
I didn't quote you or the other individual in my statement because it wasn't a personal attack,
though that was a totally irresponsible statement, and you agreed with it.
A "decent and respectable gentleman" does NOT think tickling a drunk woman without prior established consent is acceptable.
For that matter, I'd hope a gentleman would hesitate regardless.
I personally would not touch a drunk in that manner unless I'm in some relationship with that person and know what they want, again from prior conversations.
That's a COMPLETELY different scenario than that which was first presented.
I'm not about to send kudos to anyone who'd say it's no big deal to tickle a woman who's not in her right mind.
Online in abstraction perhaps it's easier to agree ---- From this personal reaction it sounds as if, in the actual situation, perhaps you would tell a thoughtless buddy to get his hands OFF a drunk woman.
But that's not what I saw in print.
And you should have considered that advice yourself before making a blanket statement that tickling is playful,
and agreeing with someone who doesn't care if the ticklee is drunk. (!!)
I should ask you, please do not promote assault or agree with those who do.
Tickling is *not always playful
by far, as anyone on this forum should know or figure out relatively quickly,and there is *no way tickling someone who's not firmly in command of their own mind or body is even close to acceptable
unless they've given permission while fully sensible, and then I'd still hesitate.
I didn't quote you or the other individual in my statement because it wasn't a personal attack,
though that was a totally irresponsible statement, and you agreed with it.
A "decent and respectable gentleman" does NOT think tickling a drunk woman without prior established consent is acceptable.
For that matter, I'd hope a gentleman would hesitate regardless.
I personally would not touch a drunk in that manner unless I'm in some relationship with that person and know what they want, again from prior conversations.
That's a COMPLETELY different scenario than that which was first presented.
I'm not about to send kudos to anyone who'd say it's no big deal to tickle a woman who's not in her right mind.
Online in abstraction perhaps it's easier to agree ---- From this personal reaction it sounds as if, in the actual situation, perhaps you would tell a thoughtless buddy to get his hands OFF a drunk woman.
But that's not what I saw in print.
BellybTickler
4th Level Orange Feather
- Joined
- May 2, 2002
- Messages
- 2,962
- Points
- 36
Glad this amuses you.
Grabbing a drunk woman and assaulting her is justa barrel of laughs.
You tickle someone without full coherent consent and that's what it is, assault.
If you high-five someone who's claimed to do that,
then don't tell me you're a gentleman.
BellybTickler
4th Level Orange Feather
- Joined
- May 2, 2002
- Messages
- 2,962
- Points
- 36
Glad this amuses you.
Grabbing a drunk woman and assaulting her is justa barrel of laughs.
You tickle someone without full coherent consent and that's what it is, assault.
If you high-five someone who's claimed to do that,
then don't tell me you're a gentleman.
can't we all just get along
That's all I've ever wanted or been asking for.
Now I wish i wouldve read this story b4 it was takin down. Must've really been somthing to have this kinda talk. I think just from the reblies alone that there are some taking this alil harsh. There is no law that says tickling somone under the influence...especially a 3 year friend makes you a creep(once again didnt read the story but just writing from what ive seen in the replies). I mean non consensual tickling happens all the time...and even alot of the time envolving those intoxicated. I mean it is an open forum and anyone with fingers(or voice recognition software) can put thier opinion and that what happened here, but it just seemed a bit overboard. I mean in not pattin him on the back for what im pretty sure im starting to gather of what he did, but im not blastin him either. Damn I really wanna read that story now.
Not too harsh. Hands off drunks, very simple.
Nonconsentual tickling, and that of those who are drunk & can't really consent DOES occur too often,
but that's *never acceptable.
We can't impose our opinions and fantasies upon the unwilling.
The problem was that the original story -- which I did not see either -- did not include the information
that the drunk woman had already consented to being tickled by this friend in advance, apparently,
that she'd told him, when sober, that he could tickle her while she was drunk...
Without that information, the story appeared to be a true account of an assault.
So one person protested.
I was really annoyed that that one person who did speak up in defense of what *appeared to be
a drunk victim who had not given consent
--was fired upon repeatedly
while the guy who appeared to have assaulted her was applauded.
It's really sad that the majority had no problem with the idea of tickling a drunk woman
& bashed the only person who commented in her defense
before it was known she'd given consent.
Nonconsentual tickling, and that of those who are drunk & can't really consent DOES occur too often,
but that's *never acceptable.
We can't impose our opinions and fantasies upon the unwilling.
The problem was that the original story -- which I did not see either -- did not include the information
that the drunk woman had already consented to being tickled by this friend in advance, apparently,
that she'd told him, when sober, that he could tickle her while she was drunk...
Without that information, the story appeared to be a true account of an assault.
So one person protested.
I was really annoyed that that one person who did speak up in defense of what *appeared to be
a drunk victim who had not given consent
--was fired upon repeatedly
while the guy who appeared to have assaulted her was applauded.
It's really sad that the majority had no problem with the idea of tickling a drunk woman
& bashed the only person who commented in her defense
before it was known she'd given consent.
anyone upset here needs to chill...
There is SO much material available that somebody somewhere would find offensive .... and so much material that many of us don't find interesting or entertaining .... SO WHAT ??? Just move on. Why spend time or energy b!tching about someone's contribution ?
To those of you who complained: Have you read the comments from people who enjoy(ed) that (type of) story ?!? Who, in the name of John Wayne's ass, appointed anyone - including daisycrazy5496 or Babbles - to be the arbiter of acceptable contributions ?? As long as it doesn't involve minors - live and let live. I consider the excoriating of contributors to be a far greater offense !
If you went to a restaurant and you thought the food sucked, you wouldn't go back -- you wouldn't make up signs and start protesting in front of that establishment. If you find someone's contribution not to your tastes or bothersome -- MOVE ON.
Better yet - if anyone really needs to unload on someone for something truly offensive - send your Senators & Congressmen repeated e-mail and b!tch about the obscene (financial) bailout monies they're throwing around like party favors. Reaching into our pockets like that - that's non-consensual, that's assault.
On a personal note: I didn't get to read the story and THAT p!sses me off.
flecke: Thanks for the contributions - and if you get a chance, please send me the story or repost it in the fiction section.
IM
There is SO much material available that somebody somewhere would find offensive .... and so much material that many of us don't find interesting or entertaining .... SO WHAT ??? Just move on. Why spend time or energy b!tching about someone's contribution ?
To those of you who complained: Have you read the comments from people who enjoy(ed) that (type of) story ?!? Who, in the name of John Wayne's ass, appointed anyone - including daisycrazy5496 or Babbles - to be the arbiter of acceptable contributions ?? As long as it doesn't involve minors - live and let live. I consider the excoriating of contributors to be a far greater offense !
If you went to a restaurant and you thought the food sucked, you wouldn't go back -- you wouldn't make up signs and start protesting in front of that establishment. If you find someone's contribution not to your tastes or bothersome -- MOVE ON.
Better yet - if anyone really needs to unload on someone for something truly offensive - send your Senators & Congressmen repeated e-mail and b!tch about the obscene (financial) bailout monies they're throwing around like party favors. Reaching into our pockets like that - that's non-consensual, that's assault.
On a personal note: I didn't get to read the story and THAT p!sses me off.
flecke: Thanks for the contributions - and if you get a chance, please send me the story or repost it in the fiction section.
IM
BellybTickler
4th Level Orange Feather
- Joined
- May 2, 2002
- Messages
- 2,962
- Points
- 36
There is SO much material available that somebody somewhere would find offensive .... and so much material that many of us don't find interesting or entertaining .... SO WHAT ??? Just move on. Why spend time or energy b!tching about someone's contribution ?
To those of you who complained: Have you read the comments from people who enjoy(ed) that (type of) story ?!? Who, in the name of John Wayne's ass, appointed anyone - including daisycrazy5496 or Babbles - to be the arbiter of acceptable contributions ?? As long as it doesn't involve minors - live and let live. I consider the excoriating of contributors to be a far greater offense !
If you went to a restaurant and you thought the food sucked, you wouldn't go back -- you wouldn't make up signs and start protesting in front of that establishment. If you find someone's contribution not to your tastes or bothersome -- MOVE ON.
Better yet - if anyone really needs to unload on someone for something truly offensive - send your Senators & Congressmen repeated e-mail and b!tch about the obscene (financial) bailout monies they're throwing around like party favors. Reaching into our pockets like that - that's non-consensual, that's assault.
On a personal note: I didn't get to read the story and THAT p!sses me off.
flecke: Thanks for the contributions - and if you get a chance, please send me the story or repost it in the fiction section.
IM
Amen
We're not talking "food" or "fiction."
You two ---
Who asked YOU to go off on this again? It was resolved.
There was a VERY VALID POINT MADE ---- No need to follow up with further unnecessary nastiness.
You're way out of line telling me or others that we didn't have the right to question something that appeared
to be horribly wrong ---
The tickling or yes, assault, of a DRUNK woman
AND/OR OTHER FORMS OF NON-CONSENSUAL ABUSE
are NOT TOLERABLE.
You disagree with that, you need a smarter legal mouthpiece, a spiritual adviser or a criminal psychologist.
Just because it "doesn't involve minors?" So in other words,
who cares if someone submits what's labelled a true story detailing the torture of an adult woman, in her right mind or not....
This is a TRUE STORY FORUM in case you didn't pay attention, NOT fantasy.
Major freakin' difference.
Flecke did not need to remove his story, no, and he can always put it back in place, as I wrote privately,
It just needed --- and I do mean needed --- the additional fact stated that
the drunk friend had given him consent, I think on more than one occasion actually.
Otherwise, without that, he just literally wrote an admission to an actual assault.
He clarified it, it was done, you didn't need to go apesh*t & waste more space here.
In fact it's really disturbing that you BOTH don't see a problem with a true-to-life account of a non-consentual assault.
I hope he does repost it, with all facts intact, the rest of us would've enjoyed it as well.
You two ---
Who asked YOU to go off on this again? It was resolved.
There was a VERY VALID POINT MADE ---- No need to follow up with further unnecessary nastiness.
You're way out of line telling me or others that we didn't have the right to question something that appeared
to be horribly wrong ---
The tickling or yes, assault, of a DRUNK woman
AND/OR OTHER FORMS OF NON-CONSENSUAL ABUSE
are NOT TOLERABLE.
You disagree with that, you need a smarter legal mouthpiece, a spiritual adviser or a criminal psychologist.
Just because it "doesn't involve minors?"
So in other words,who cares if someone submits what's labelled a true story detailing the torture of an adult woman, in her right mind or not....
This is a TRUE STORY FORUM in case you didn't pay attention, NOT fantasy.
Major freakin' difference.
Flecke did not need to remove his story, no, and he can always put it back in place, as I wrote privately,
It just needed --- and I do mean needed --- the additional fact stated that
the drunk friend had given him consent, I think on more than one occasion actually.
Otherwise, without that, he just literally wrote an admission to an actual assault.
He clarified it, it was done, you didn't need to go apesh*t & waste more space here.
In fact it's really disturbing that you BOTH don't see a problem with a true-to-life account of a non-consentual assault.
I hope he does repost it, with all facts intact, the rest of us would've enjoyed it as well.
Last edited:
Forum?
No intent to further pummel the poor horse, but aren't the posts in this thread all valid, and one of the major reasons for the forum? ... to "air it out" if you feel compelled to reply to any post? I know I do, and isn't that the whole point?
Not everyone is going to get on with or agree with everybody and everything posted here (ha, I've had my own moments) ... but if you feel that someone's else's post is out of line or whatever, you can always shoot them a PM (or to the mod of your choice if that doesn't help, and let them handle it).
Plus, I now know about a new smilie
No intent to further pummel the poor horse, but aren't the posts in this thread all valid, and one of the major reasons for the forum? ... to "air it out" if you feel compelled to reply to any post? I know I do, and isn't that the whole point?
Not everyone is going to get on with or agree with everybody and everything posted here (ha, I've had my own moments) ... but if you feel that someone's else's post is out of line or whatever, you can always shoot them a PM (or to the mod of your choice if that doesn't help, and let them handle it).
Plus, I now know about a new smilie
Great balls !!
Babbles wrote: "Who asked YOU to go off on this again?" and "...waste more space..."
Who asked me ?!? I was wasting space ?? That question and statement sum up the hubris with which Babbles addresses others who disagree with her point of view. While no one in this forum expects particularly obsequious behavior - it is NOW clear that Babbles feels she has to have the last word, like she's entitled to that, and that her ruling is final. Although that's sad - personally, I now find it to be laughable.
Setting aside the entitlement mindset so pervasive in the Democratic party - and irrespective of any additional posts on this matter - I'm done here. And while I much prefer mutually amenable resolutions, I'm pretty sure that I should tell Babs to kiss my ass and call it a love story.
And BTW, Babs, I passed the Bar in PA in 1981.
Babbles wrote: "Who asked YOU to go off on this again?" and "...waste more space..."
Who asked me ?!? I was wasting space ?? That question and statement sum up the hubris with which Babbles addresses others who disagree with her point of view. While no one in this forum expects particularly obsequious behavior - it is NOW clear that Babbles feels she has to have the last word, like she's entitled to that, and that her ruling is final. Although that's sad - personally, I now find it to be laughable.
Setting aside the entitlement mindset so pervasive in the Democratic party - and irrespective of any additional posts on this matter - I'm done here. And while I much prefer mutually amenable resolutions, I'm pretty sure that I should tell Babs to kiss my ass and call it a love story.
And BTW, Babs, I passed the Bar in PA in 1981.
I tried...
Excerpt
Yes, exactly, who asked you to go off on me???
Or anyone else, for making a valid point???
You tell me I shouldn't have commented on the content of this thread,
that assault doesn't matter as long as minors aren't involved,
you're rude about it --- and you wonder.
Yeah, it was resolved, unfortunately it was also removed ----
All you did was add to the conflict instead of the resolution.
You were aggressive & negative from the get-go, and probably purposely misconstrued my posts.
---- Looking more closely --- You did purposely misrepresent me, taking my comments out of context & assigning my sentence fragments the meaning of YOUR choice by inference.
I guess that's proof you're a conservative lawyer.
I would never take that tone with anyone for making a contribution, especially in a thread that isn't mine,
but yours was an inappropriate personal slam.
If you are in fact a lawyer, and I guess your gross insensitivity would be in keeping with the stereotype,
your lack of comprehension & concern is what's chilling.
I sincerely hope that if you DID find a position in that field since 1981,
you have nothing to do with assault cases or their victims, drunk or sober.
You had an admission of guilt staring you in the face and you laughed at that too.
Yeah, I'd call that a waste of space as well as a bar exam.
Excerpt
Yes, exactly, who asked you to go off on me???
Or anyone else, for making a valid point???
You tell me I shouldn't have commented on the content of this thread,
that assault doesn't matter as long as minors aren't involved,
you're rude about it --- and you wonder.
Yeah, it was resolved, unfortunately it was also removed ----
All you did was add to the conflict instead of the resolution.
Babbles wrote: "Who asked YOU to go off on this again?" and "...waste more space..."
Who asked me ?!? I was wasting space ?? That question and statement sum up the hubris with which Babbles addresses others who disagree with her point of view. While no one in this forum expects particularly obsequious behavior - it is NOW clear that Babbles feels she has to have the last word, like she's entitled to that, and that her ruling is final. Although that's sad - personally, I now find it to be laughable.
Setting aside the entitlement mindset so pervasive in the Democratic party - and irrespective of any additional posts on this matter - I'm done here. And while I much prefer mutually amenable resolutions, I'm pretty sure that I should tell Babs to kiss my ass and call it a love story.
And BTW, Babs, I passed the Bar in PA in 1981.
You were aggressive & negative from the get-go, and probably purposely misconstrued my posts.
---- Looking more closely --- You did purposely misrepresent me, taking my comments out of context & assigning my sentence fragments the meaning of YOUR choice by inference.
I guess that's proof you're a conservative lawyer.
I would never take that tone with anyone for making a contribution, especially in a thread that isn't mine,
but yours was an inappropriate personal slam.
If you are in fact a lawyer, and I guess your gross insensitivity would be in keeping with the stereotype,
your lack of comprehension & concern is what's chilling.
I sincerely hope that if you DID find a position in that field since 1981,
you have nothing to do with assault cases or their victims, drunk or sober.
You had an admission of guilt staring you in the face and you laughed at that too.
Yeah, I'd call that a waste of space as well as a bar exam.
Last edited:
