I'm not saying that people should go around and spill the beans about their fetish
You've been saying all along that the person being tickled deserves to know that in the mind of the tickler, he's sexually aroused by the tickling. If you're not advocating a verbal confession, how is that supposed to happen? Osmosis? Clairvoyance?
I'll spell this out so that even somebody with 2nd grade reading comprehension can understand.
Are you sure that won't be too taxing for you? Maybe you should work up to that.
Let's ask wikipedia to define sexual fetishism:
"the sexual arousal a person receives from a physical object, or from a specific situation."
Notice it's all about the person receiving arousal. Not about what what they are giving. The only sexual activity going on is in the mind of the fetishist. The behavior itself isn't sexual.
Now, let's ask wikipedia again, to define sexual abuse:
"also referred to as molestation, is the forcing of undesired sexual behavior by one person upon another. When that force is immediate, of short duration, or infrequent, it is called sexual assault. The offender is referred to as a sexual abuser or (often pejoratively) molester."
The behavior that we're talking about as described in the OP is not forced. It's consensual. Furthermore, it is not sexual behavior. It's tickling. So the behavior in question fails the litmus test for sexual abuse. Twice.
Person A sees tickling as a sexual fetish.
Person B's thoughts are not even expressed or implied.
Person A is tickling Person B.
Person A is being directly aroused by interacting with Person B, without their foreknowledge of the arousal.
Therefore, Person A is forcing sexual behavior on Person B.
Wrong as usual.
Tickling is not sexual behavior despite the opinion of the tickler. If the behavior is non-consensually forced on Person B, then you have simple assault. If the tickling is consensual, then there is no force. Either way, there is no sexual behavior going on.
Now, am I going to have to break out some stuffed animals, or put on a silly puppet show about sexual abuse, or do you understand yet?
Whatever floats your boat, Purps. Your inability to make a point without theatrics is no reflection on me.
You are comparing the wrong things.
It's not me who's comparing them at all. It's you. They are incomparable in my opinion.
The right things to compare would be pedophilia and a tickling fetish. The only difference between the two is that one can never be lived out with the consent of the desired partner.
There's another bigger difference. You are comparing what you perceive as sexual activity between adults with what you perceive as sexual activity between an adult and a child. Though there are any number of comparable situations between adults, it seems you are never able to make this case without a comparison to pedophilia, which says a lot about your case.
Let's compare something else:
I would love to, but you seem bent on continuing the comparison with pedophilia.
1. Person A tickling person B because person A is into tickling and gets aroused by it.
2. Person A tickling a kid because person B is into kids and gets aroused by touching them.
Person B and the kid (or the kid's parents) are not aware of the sexual preference of person A. So, where exactly is the difference between those two situations?
One involves children. The other does not. That difference alone disqualifies this line of argument.
Can you prove your point without resorting to comparisons to the unrelated topic of pedophilia?
rhiannon
What I want and what I excpect from my friends is that they don't use me for their sexual pleasures without me knowing. It's kind of a trust issue.
DAJT
That's fine for YOU, but you're preaching to everybody in this thread and in every other thread like this as though your trust issues apply to everybody.
I have news for you. They don't.
rhiannon
I know. But they more than likely apply to a lot of the people who are tickled by tickling fetishists without being aware that they are being used for sexual pleasure. So, as long as you can't be sure that they don't apply for ANYBODY BUT ME, it is morally wrong.
First, the vast majority of the world is unaware of tickling fetishists, so your contention that your trust issues regarding them is likely shared by anything close to a significant number is ludicrous at best.
Secondly, before a breach of trust between two people can occur, there has to be some kind of agreement to begin with. An understanding at the very least. Your trust issue in this regard is built upon no such agreement. People are evidently supposed to just know that's how you feel?
Finally, you conclude it's immoral to tickle somebody who doesn't know it arouses you because there is a possibility they might have a trust issue with it, even if no such agreement was previously established.
Face it, rhiannon. You are trying to push your morals on the rest of us. We'll decide our own morals without your help, thank you very much.
Fyi, Rhiannon, not seeing a difference between tickling a girl, and have a child sitting in a pedophiles lap is weirder than anything said to this point. I think you have some sort of social disorder that doesn't allow you to see anything but extremes in even the most mild of social topics.
I can't take anything you say seriously from here on out.
Well said. I confess I've reached that point as well.
