True story: the nurse I tied and tickled

[jonsmith]

Oh will you guys Shut UP?!

Yes, we can hear from the story that he did what he did, we don't have the right to judge him. Only he can judge himself properly. If he sees his actions as bad, then fine. If he sees it as good, fine.

It's his issue, and he might have dealt with it,

Why should you care that he did this way back when? Like...nineteen years ago? Golly gee whiz!

IN all, I enjoyed the story. Em Es, I like the honesty in it.

 

[Babbles]

Obvious and repeated. Quit trying to whitewash it.

I'm not comfortable judging anyone, believe it or not, I am certainly and obviously very far from perfect, but posts like this should piss off any reasonable person. Don't claim bragging rights to purposeful misusage and "devastation" of a trusting young woman.

She was a mere mark on your bedpost, literally. I'm not going to congratulate you for taking horrific advantage of her deep emotional interest. You made it clear you forgot about her totally until she called you back ---- she was thinking about you for weeks, you couldn't have cared less, and took advantage of her interest.

Clearly your "interest" was in her expression of interest in you,
she was cute & pleasant enough but not dating material for you, as you stated clearly --------

your interest was in
her availability, its convenience, and her ticklishness.

It was exceptionally cruel to KNOWINGLY take advantage of her deep feelings for you.

I've only repeated this how often ---- YOU DON'T KISS, TIE AND TICKLE A TOPLESS WOMAN ON YOUR BED ---- FOR MONTHS!!!!! ------ WHEN YOU KNOW SHE CARES FOR YOU, AND YOU FEEL NOTHING ----- AND YOU LET HER THINK SHE'S YOUR *GIRLFRIEND????

You lied by omission, as you yourself stated ---- you ALLOWED HER TO THINK SHE WAS YOUR GIRLFRIEND FOR 2-3 MONTHS -----
so she would continue to allow you to tickle her in a VERY intimate context.

And no, I have never done anything of the sort, and I'd hope someone would shoot me before I could.

On the rare occasion I've actually realized someone was seriously interested when I wasn't, I was VERY careful ---- AGAIN ---- not to go beyond 2-3 dates.

I KNOW PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN SERIOUSLY MESSED UP FOR *YEARS BY THIS SORT OF PERSON,
BY THIS SORT OF BULLSHIT. YES you are responsible if you KNOW you're playing with someone else's emotions. This should hardly be celebrated here. Maybe someone else will see ---- this is not acceptable, it's not humane.

IF you don't see anything wrong with this ----- and if it isn't clear why so many are upset by this abuse ----- there's something seriously wrong with you, whoever you are.

*

 

[Em Es]

I wonder, wonder who, who-oo-ooh, who - who wrote the Book of Love?

I think the authors are all contributing to this discussion.

Tinkerhead414, I realize the printed word can seem harsher than intended. But my replies seek understanding, not a won argument.

Lovely Rhiannon, you say, "If you just told her that you are only interested in the tickling, then I would say 'Okay, he was honest about it'. [sic] But you weren't . . . "

Why does one person have to tell the other anything? Isn't dating the way two get to know one another? By your logic, shouldn't people interested in one another have lawyers draw up terms for their dates?

"Because [Maria] only [let you tickle her] to please you, not because she liked it!"

No, it pleased Maria to please me. I know; I was there. Were you?

meangry, you say, "I'm not the guy who strung girls along simply because they are ticklish . . ."

I suggest reading my true story again. What made me see Maria after our blind date was the fact that she called me. I had not called her even though I knew she was ticklish. But when I realized she liked me enough to put herself out there by picking up the phone, all the pieces fit.

Babbles, you say, "She was a mere mark on your bedpost, literally. . . . Clearly your 'interest' was in her expression of interest in you, she was cute & pleasant enough but not dating material for you, as you stated clearly -------- your interest was in her availability, its convenience, and her ticklishness. . . . YOU KNOW SHE CARES FOR YOU, AND YOU FEEL NOTHING ----- AND YOU LET HER THINK SHE'S YOUR *GIRLFRIEND????"

Who said anything about making Maria a notch on my bedpost? I don't hump and tell. Yes, I liked her for all the reasons I've repeated more than once, and as I've also said more than once, when I realized Maria was seeing this as more than dating, I felt bad for her and called it off. This was two or three months, not years.

Jesus Christ, you say, " . . . we don't have the right to judge him."

That's your best stuff since the Sermon on the Mount! Thanks.

 

[mass1926]

😀

You say, " . . . you took advantage of a girl . . . in order to fulfill your own selfish pleasures. . . . all you wanted was to use her as a play toy. She kept making it clear that she didn't want to play tie-up or tickling, but obviously wanted to make you happy hoping that someday you would see her as something deeper in meaning.

" . . . I sincerely doubt your [sic] Orlando Bloom or Johnny Depp, so the fact that a girl liked you should've been worth giving her a shot in a relationship more than saying she's slightly chubby and not worth your time outside of using her as a fetish object . . . "

Where in my story did I say any of that?

Also, you say, "You teeter on the border of sociopathic tendencies because you have no regard for another person's feelings." Where did you get your Ph.D. in psychiatry, mass1926? Oprah University?

I know more than enough about behaviors that are beyond acceptable as well as the profile of individuals that display such tendencies.


I've studied several sociology courses as well as psychiatry while obtaining my degree in business. All part of the general requirements of the liberal arts portion of a degree. 😀

Some information on sociopaths fresh out of one of my old psychology textbooks:

-Callousness/Lack of Empathy
Unable to empathize with their victims, having only contempt for others' feelings of distress and readily taking advantage of them.

-Manipulative and Conning
They never recognize the rights of others and see their self-serving behaviors as permissible. They appear to be charming, yet are covertly hostile and domineering, seeing their victim as merely an instrument to be used. They may dominate and humiliate their victims.

-Irresponsibility/Unreliability
Not concerned about wrecking others' lives and dreams. Oblivious or indifferent to the devastation they cause. Does not accept blame themselves, but blames others, even for acts they obviously committed.


These are just a few qualities that you clearly possess. Discussing how you had no attraction to this woman, she obviously liked you, and you readily exploited her attraction to you by using her for your own selfish wants. You had no regard for her feelings. She continued to see you hoping that maybe you would connect with her, even asking for no more tickling or tying up, but you cared nothing for her or what she wanted. You treated her like a toy or possession to dispose of at your liking. You put her into situations that she really preferred not to be in despite the fact that you felt nothing for her. That is severely messed up.

 

[Babbles]

Senseless.

Tinkerhead414,
Lovely Rhiannon... Why does one person have to tell the other anything?

No, it pleased Maria to please me. I know; I was there.

meangry, you say, "I'm not the guy who strung girls along simply because they are ticklish . . ."

I suggest reading my true story again. What made me see Maria after our blind date was the fact that she called me. I had not called her even though I knew she was ticklish. But when I realized she liked me enough to put herself out there by picking up the phone, all the pieces fit.

Babbles, you say, "She was a mere mark on your bedpost, literally. . . . Clearly your 'interest' was in her expression of interest in you, she was cute & pleasant enough but not dating material for you, as you stated clearly -------- your interest was in her availability, its convenience, and her ticklishness. . . . YOU KNOW SHE CARES FOR YOU, AND YOU FEEL NOTHING ----- AND YOU LET HER THINK SHE'S YOUR *GIRLFRIEND????"

Who said anything about making Maria a notch on my bedpost? I don't hump and tell. Yes, I liked her for all the reasons I've repeated more than once, and as I've also said more than once, when I realized Maria was seeing this as more than dating, I felt bad for her and called it off. This was two or three months, not years.

You either really don't get just how disgustingly cruel that was,

or you think someone else's emotional distress ---- because 2-3 months is a VERY significant amount of time to knowingly mislead, allowing someone to THINK that you're interested when you tie them to your bed & have your way with them -- I don't want to know, but if you also slept with her knowing she cared so much & you didn't, there aren't words vile enough to describe your behavior, it's horrible to begin....

Or you think someone else's distress is a joke, and you're enjoying the negative attention. Keep joking & bragging about using this woman.

I've repeated myself clearly often enough. I really pity your wife.
That nurse actually got the better deal ---- she got away, though not before being badly used for far too long.

 

[Em Es]

By now, even the wall understands

mass1926you list several personality traits and say "These are just a few qualities that you clearly possess."

You're drawing such conclusions based on one web site posting? Were you also one of the "doctors" who said Terri Schiavo was not brain dead based on a short video?

"Senseless," Babbles? You said it, girl!

You say, " . . . if you also slept with her knowing she cared so much & you didn't, there aren't words vile enough to describe your behavior, it's horrible to begin...."

Now you sound like that guy in the movie Stripes who warns his fellow Army recruits, "If anybody touches my stuff, I'll kill ya! If anybody calls me 'Francis,' I'll kill ya!"

Anything else you want to warn me about in case I did it 19 years ago?

 

[Babbles]

Anything else you want to warn me about in case I did it 19 years ago?

Any other cruelties you're still bragging about today? No.

 

[Em Es]

At the risk of repeating myself . . .



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrllCZw8jiM

 

[rhiannon]

Lovely Rhiannon, you say, "If you just told her that you are only interested in the tickling, then I would say 'Okay, he was honest about it'. [sic] But you weren't . . . "

Why does one person have to tell the other anything? Isn't dating the way two get to know one another? By your logic, shouldn't people interested in one another have lawyers draw up terms for their dates?

You know, dating and relationships is about trust. When I met my husband, I told him upfront that I was NOT looking for a relationship. Even though he was, he still decided to give it a try and continued to see me. And I fell in love. Still, if that didn't happen and I told him I didn't want to see him anymore, I wouldn't have had anything to blame myself about because I told him my intentions!

 

[Em Es]

Rhiannon

If that worked for your old man and you, who would question it? I wanted to see Maria to get to know her and, if nothing else, for casual fun but never told her otherwise. When I realized Maria wanted more than I could give her, I stopped seeing her. I could have led her on but did not.

Don't applaud. Throw money!

 

[rhiannon]

You never told her you were interested in more. You never told her you WEREN'T interested in more, because you very well knew that she probably would not have met you again then! You made her believe that you wanted more. You misled her. And that is wrong!

 

[Em Es]

But Rhiannon

You never said you wouldn't let me tie and tickle you then have sex with you even though you never said you would! How could you do that to me, leading me on like that?!

 

[jonsmith]

Damn, some people always have opinions....

 

[rhiannon]

You never said you wouldn't let me tie and tickle you then have sex with you even though you never said you would! How could you do that to me, leading me on like that?!

Oh please. That was lame, don't you think?

 

[Em Es]

No

No, Rhiannon, it is just as valid as your question. When you say, "You never told her you WEREN'T interested in more," it's like convicting a defendant because he can't prove he did not commit the crime of which he is accused.

Jesus Christ, if anyone is in a position to damn people and their opinions, it's you, bro!

 

[rhiannon]

It doesn't matter how you twist and turn it, it was wrong how you treated her, and I believe you know that.

 

[Em Es]

Read it again

Rhiannon, I recommend you read it again. When I realized Maria was thinking we were going somewhere, I called it off. Had I continued to see her at that point, I would have been leading her on. But I let Maria go.

 

[mass1926]

You know what Em Es is? He's a winner because he stood in the face of adversity and said, "I shall not accept No for an answer!" Did Kobe Bryant take accept "no" when he banged a chick in the ass at a hotel? I didn't think so. Last time I checked my friends, Kobe Bryant is a champion. I rest my case. 🙂

 

[sirseaspraysr]

Resurrecting The Thread

Going over old posts, I came across this old thread that generated a bit of controversy: Did Em Es act correctly in not ending earlier a relationship he knew was not going anywhere?

I believe he did act correctly and the confusion lies in the public's misunderstanding of the role that the pre-marital Love-Heartbreak Cycle plays in our lives.

In the old days of arranged marriages, hook-ups were simple. The fathers got together and compared family bank accounts. Marrying for love was an unheard of luxury mainly because it was always so erratic and unpredictable. Absolutely nobody knows when they'll fall in love, even when they think they do. Everyone follows Elvin Bishop's song, "I Fooled Around and Fell in Love". Had Em Es fooled around with his nurse longer he may well have been married with her today regardless of what he planned. Unexpected love is not just common, it is the rule.

People in a relationship do not fall in love at the exact same instant. Invariably, one partner falls in love while the other is still "fooling around". The Partner-In-Love makes an emotional investment and hangs around hoping that the other party will eventually feel the same. Some time it works out, but usually it doesn't. When it doesn't, the Partner-In-Love experiences the awful Love-Heartbreak Cycle and learns to fear it. But what is the alternative? Is the Partner-Not-In-Love honor-bound to end the relationship when they detect the other is serious? If that were true, no one would ever hook up. To say otherwise, would be to maintain that the onset of love can be predicted. Hate the Game, not the Player.

The Love-Heartbreak Cycle is a savage, brutal thing. There's nothing politically-correct or sweet about it. Unfortunately, young people will, and need to, experience many, many such cycles before marriage. For one thing, the experience acquired allows you to pick a good mate. With the divorce rate standing at 66% for young people in big cities, that, in itself, is a good thing. The benefits of the Love-Heartbreak Cycle, however, go beyond that. In therapy, we find that subjects of arranged marriages, even when they work out, experience a certain malaise and unhappiness about how they spent their young adult-hood. It's been likened to spending your youth locked in a box.They experience a sense of having missed out on the opportunity to explore what's out there. To see how they would fare on the open market. Nature never intended for us to play it safe. Engaging in the Love-Heartbreak Cycle should be regarded as every young person's full-time JOB. It should be embraced, not avoided. To not do so is to be left with a feeling that you've misspent your youth and not fully lived.

The Love-Heartbreak Cycle is a force of nature that cannot be circumvented. Informing your Partner-In-Love that you are not interested in seeking a serious relationship is neither informative nor soothing. They already know you're not in love and are hoping you'll change your mind; nor will your failure to do so spare them the pain of heartbreak.

---Sir Sea Spray Sr

 

[NixTickles]

my turn my turn my turn! 😀 i seen this and read through it and i noticed something interestin...

"I didn't call Maria after that date. I didn't like her that much. And I did not realize how much she liked me - and how willing to prove it she would be.

A few weeks later Maria called me. Only then did it dawn on me: While not my dream girl, Maria was cute enough and, most important, ticklish. Why not see her again, just for tickling fun?"

"Of course Maria interested me. Had she not interested me, I would have turned her down when she called. Why would I see her if she did not interest me?"

"you say I saw Maria "because of the tickling" but what made me want to see her again was the fact that she called me. Once I realized she liked me enough to put herself out there, that was what closed the deal"

"Why would I see Maria if she did not interest me?"

"No, it pleased Maria to please me. I know; I was there. Were you?"

all these quotes r from the OP. basically he is defending himself by stating that even though he knew the girl liked him and it was obvious she wanted a relationship, after the phone call he still only wanted to tickle her. of course without tellin the girl that he wasnt interested in a relationship to begin with the, he got to have his fun. i bet if he had told her that he wouldnt have gotten ne more tickles on the girl.

another note is that he clearly states in his post that she was "cute enough" and "most importantly" ticklish. he says he had interest in the girl... that much is true and this is how so... he says he didnt put 2 and 2 together until he realized the girl liked him and would potential let him have soem fun in the process. now if this girl wasnt ticklish i highly doubt he would have pursued her after the call. but since she was there lies his interest.

now since most of us here r smart u can see clearly that he rly was only interested in tickling her, not rly her in general. i dont believe that pleasing u pleased her in the least, i believe that by allowing u to tickle her would show some sort of affection toward her thus building more false hope into the 'relationship" from her point of view and causing her to think that by "playing" with her u r showing how much u in fact liked her when actually u only wanted to tickle her.

also to point out im sure that even if she showed u how much she liked u if she didnt put out to let u tickle her even for a bit uda forgotten bout her in a second.

i for one think its an ok story, not much into detail rly but it was ok. as for him trying to defend himself and making it look like he did nothing wrong... im sure he believes he did nothing wrong, but its obvious he was playing her.

of course u shoulda been smart enough to know that if she didnt like being tickled but let u tie her up and tickle her... that shit was goin to go somewhere >.>, if u had to wait for her to tll u that it would then u my friend r quite clouded and have a small to moderate lacking of common sense.

 

[PurpleStyle]

Or maybe he's just bullshitting everybody. Who's to say?

 

[Em Es]

Before I put more wear and tear on my beautiful fingertips

Perhaps someone who likes easy targets more than I do would like to point out what is obvious to all but three out of the last four individuals to post in this discussion?

 

[sirseaspraysr]

The problem is that no one is looking at it from the nurse's point of view.

She either: (A) was also uncertain about the future and was satisfied with things as they were. In which case, Em Es' premature termination, however well-meant, would have done her an injustice. Em Es, after all, was only guessing as to her expectations. (She never asked & he never lied. Had he done so, he clearly would have been in the wrong).

or, most likely, (B) knew perfectly well that while she was ready to commit, Em Es was not. (People who are ready, say so. They talk about the future. People who don't, avoid such talk and focus on the present. Everybody knows where their partner stands on the subject. No one is deceived. She knew better than to bring up such a topic prematurely.) She hoped that, as the relationship proceeded, he would change his mind. This is how all, ALL, couples fall in love. Two people, not only, never fall in love at the same time, statistically they never know when they'll fall in love--even if they think they do.

What if we were all honor-bound to terminate a relationship, when we detected our partner was more serious than we were, in order to spare their feelings? Nurse Maria would certainly not have appreciated being denied the opportunity to change his mind--neither would half of the married people on the planet that did succeed in changing their partners' mind.

The Love-Heartbreak Cycle is an essential component of Love and cannot be circumvented, it must be allowed to play itself out. As long as Em Es was enjoying himself, the decision to terminate rightfully belongs to Maria alone. She would not appreciate that right being taken from her by Em Es or anyone else. Em Es was guilty of being too nice a guy.


---Sir Sea Spray Sr

 

[Em Es]

Thank you, Sir Sea Spray Sr

"Too nice a guy" - the inscription on my tombstone some day.

 

[Babbles]

Maybe I already wrote, people sometimes get MARRIED w/in a few months...

The problem is that no one is looking at it from the nurse's point of view...

Actually that has been the primary concern, the nurse's point of view.

If you continue to date someone, even if you don't talk about "forever,"
you're insinuating you're interested enough to see where things go,
you're giving the impression there might be a chance....

But once you know you're not interested in anything but the physical benefits
(in this case causing the woman to endure tickle torture she apparently hated otherwise)

and you know the other person is hooked emotionally --- with no chance it'll be returned---
the "nice guy" leaves ASAP rather than keeping the woman hoping and getting MORE emotionally hooked.
Forget taking sexual and sado-masochistic advantage

The longer he stayed, knowing there was no chance for her, the longer he continued and increased her pain, not only from the tickle torture but emotionally. It reads like he slept with her after torturing her....

EDIT: I looked back: He used her, and badly, 2-3 MONTHS AFTER REALIZING there was NO interest in her whatsoever after THE FIRST DATE
I'm sorry but no freakin' way. This was not something to brag about.

I'm no Angelia Jolie and I'm far from perfect but if a guy I wasn't interested in (and I KNEW I could never be)
wanted to continue dating, I'd find the most plausible excuse and GET OUT ASAP before using the guy.

NO WAY do you continue to take ANYTHING from that person,
be it dinner, money, jewelry, whatever and CERTAINLY not their sexual-masochistic agony because it ******* gets you off.