What do you need more of, looks or ticklishness?

[FootballGuy]

And I made add, if that's your abs in your signature, you helped on more levels than just one! 😀

Those are in fact my abs. 🙂

 

[Leo tickles]

This thread is hilarious...

Why people are shocked that men see women as "physical objects" and not purely looked at as "personality wonders" must live in a cave. Since the dawn of freakin' time, women have been looked upon by men for what they LOOK like. I really hate to break this to some of you, but no matter how great a personality is, no matter how big their heart is, how great of a mother she may be, how great she cooks, she could be the greatest person on Earth, if she is physically unattractive to one by a GREAT deal (everyone's "standards" can vary which is why I can't point out someone specifically that is "ugly") a relationship ain't going to happen. It would be very rare. More rare than a shark doing the dance move "the twist" on the moon with a giraffe.

Their has to be some degree of physical attraction. The woman may not necessarily be a "supermodel", but she has to have some form of attractiveness for men to be attracted too. So stop all this "women are more than looks" rhetoric. Men are men. This is no secret, yet people act like this is a new shocking concept. Get over it.

To answer the OP's question, I would like to have a good combination of both. An attractive woman with some ticklishness. She doesn't have to be a 10 in either scale, but a good "6" in both scales would suit me just fine.

At first I was going to argue this, but it's actually absolutely spot on. Women are more than numbers, but if there was a scale and a woman fell below a 5? Nope. I'm like a supermodel to some people and a very ugly fuck to others. It doesn't matter how great of a person I am if they can't stand to look at me. Same shit applies.


Being happy with somebody who I don't really want to look at would be as silly as buying a ring I don't want to wear just because I'm too afraid to look a little harder for a better choice.

 

[FootballGuy]

Primetime, you claim a "6" on both scales would suit you but what if she was a total selfish bitch who likes to sit on her ass all day while you're out working? Is she still a 6?

I don't think anyone is saying men shouldn't or don't judge women based on their looks (at least I hope not since women clearly judge by looks as well). Just saying that there's more to a woman than looks.

Even if I'm having a one night stand, she's going to be way more fun if she's flirty and personable instead of a cold, dead fish who just lies there and takes it.

Thank you. I get so tired of people who say looks don't matter. What a load of crap! If 2 women walk into a bar, one looks like Megan Fox, the other looks like Roseanne Barr, which one do you think is going to catch my eye? I know it's not Politically Correct, but it's the truth

Nobody's saying looks don't matter but yes, I agree, screw Political Correctness.

 

[Thatsecretchord]

This thread is hilarious...

Why people are shocked that men see women as "physical objects" and not purely looked at as "personality wonders" must live in a cave. Since the dawn of freakin' time, women have been looked upon by men for what they LOOK like. I really hate to break this to some of you, but no matter how great a personality is, no matter how big their heart is, how great of a mother she may be, how great she cooks, she could be the greatest person on Earth, if she is physically unattractive to one by a GREAT deal (everyone's "standards" can vary which is why I can't point out someone specifically that is "ugly") a relationship ain't going to happen. It would be very rare. More rare than a shark doing the dance move "the twist" on the moon with a giraffe.

Their has to be some degree of physical attraction. The woman may not necessarily be a "supermodel", but she has to have some form of attractiveness for men to be attracted too. So stop all this "women are more than looks" rhetoric. Men are men. This is no secret, yet people act like this is a new shocking concept. Get over it.

To answer the OP's question, I would like to have a good combination of both. An attractive woman with some ticklishness. She doesn't have to be a 10 in either scale, but a good "6" in both scales would suit me just fine.

Yah defo all of this but let's not forget we're talking about pornography here not the girl your gonna marry! Does it really make us shallow people that we don't want to watch people we don't find attractive being tickled? Of course looks matter and Ill only watch a vid if I think the girl is at least an 8! Ticklishness needs to be probably an 8 too so maybe I've just got high standards...

 

[Boy Ticklish]

Since I'm a lee, I shouldn't even be posting, but I have to say this much: As far as the ratio of attraction:ticklishness, I'd go 7:1

Now, if she's a ler, than the ratio would be slightly different.

 

[primetime]

Primetime, you claim a "6" on both scales would suit you but what if she was a total selfish bitch who likes to sit on her ass all day while you're out working? Is she still a 6?

I don't think anyone is saying men shouldn't or don't judge women based on their looks (at least I hope not since women clearly judge by looks as well). Just saying that there's more to a woman than looks.

Even if I'm having a one night stand, she's going to be way more fun if she's flirty and personable instead of a cold, dead fish who just lies there and takes it.



Nobody's saying looks don't matter but yes, I agree, screw Political Correctness.

Here is the problem with this thread. If anyone bothered to read the OP clearly, he is asking for a SPECIFIC thing. He is talking about attractiveness vs ticklishness, NOT attractiveness and personality. Guess what, people who are very attractive (9-10 scale) also can have great personalities. Just like people who are a 1 or 2 in attractiveness can also have ugly personalities.

That is why this thread is hilarious. The topic is, if you can have a relationship with someone and it is either looks or ticklishness? This has NOTHING to do with how the person is with personality. We all KNOW personality plays a great part in relationships, but for the topic at hand, personality has nothing to do with it.

Does this make any sense to people? People made a big deal out of nothing....

 

[ChicagoDavid]

Actually, if you really want to have fun, start a thread that says, “on a 1-10 scale, you get 30 total points for 4 categories: purely physical looks, ticklishness, personality (focusing on how much fun the person is to be with, from your perspective), and level of caring/considerateness/charitability...

 

[Ticklerguy4u]

I've had women admit to me that they don't even like to talk to men that in their words "gross them out."
With that said...
I don't mind a women I find to be average-lookng but they must be ticklish. 5=attractive/10=ticklish

For some reason I keep seeing Chicago's face pic to this post...lmao!

 

[ArchNemesis]

OK this may sound a bit crass...but you know how man sometimes rate women on a scale of one to ten, based on looks? And we often rate each other or ourselves in ticklishness on a scale of one to ten. Well...let's say you're going to meet either a play partner or someone you'd actually want to be in a relationship with. So, they've got 1-10 for looks, and 1-10 for ticklishness. So maximum score = 20. But lets say, they can only equal 15 between those two scales. So they're not going to be really unattractive or totally non-ticklish, but somewhere in between.

I don't think I noticed the rules to this when I originally answered, but then I don't remember seeing anyone who actually did answer it by the rules: "if they could only equal 15, I'd choose _ in looks and _ in ticklishness". But I apologize for not answering properly the first time. If they could only equal 15, I'd choose a 9 in looks and a 6 in ticklishness. As I said looks are more important to me in a woman, and a 6/10 in ticklishness I think would be enough to keep my interest. The ego gratification of being seen with a 9 in the looks department would make up for the hit I'd be taking in the ticklishness department. So there, I answered properly.

 

[sonnymadler]

I haven't yet been in any relationships, so I can't say for sure. I do know that I decide on whether a girl is attractive or not. There are always women who try so hard at improving their looks, applying tons of makeup, that they end up looking worse than wax figures. But first impression is always first. I don't like scaling people down by numbers. The first thing that catches your eye is how a person looks top to bottom. Deny it if you will, but it's a subconscious thing for both men and women. When I meet a girl, I don't immediately strive to find out about her ticklishness. I get to know her as a person first, then I decide whether I want to involve myself further with her or not. If she's smart, cute-looking, fun, bubbly, playful, not too stubborn, tolerant, and likes and understands me as a person, great. If she's ticklish on top of it, awesome! I choose the people I deal with in life, both professionally and personally. I'm a complicated and stubborn guy, what can I say? But if I click with someone personality-wise, I can be either just cool and fun to be with or amazing, rewarding, fun, unpredictable and the soul of the party. If we don't click, I let them know almost straight up that we might not get along, and I won't be the one to back down. And that goes for both men and women.

Sorry for my long banter. Bottom line, I can't predict whom I'm gonna end up with. But I would've preferred a smart, decent-looking girl with a fun personality and at least mildly ticklish (it's an inescapable part of who I am, so I would've liked to have that. I need to hear her giggle from my playful stroking). Decent feet as well, since I'm a foot guy, but that's not a priority.

 

[Bohemianne]

You know, the thread pretty much reminds me of the "beauty & the beast" stuff.
The beast was badly distressed.

 

[luvgirlsfeet]

facial looks for me doesn't really matter as long as the girl has taken great care of her feet is ticklish and lets me tickle her than I'm very happy

 

[TTT for joy]

When it comes to potential partners, I am quite tolerant when it comes to looks. Sure I need at least some attraction to a given girl, but I would say, I am more demanding when it comes to things like intelligence and personality. As for ticklishness, I'd say that just because I am into tickling, I don't think I really require it to have a fulfilled sex life (although that's hard to from a standpoint of a virgin ^^ ).
So yeah, I'd place looks above ticklishness any time, but looks are not that important to me in the first place.

 

[myth77]

First off, I realize I may not be the intended target audience the OP wanted to answer this thread, but I do find it interesting. While I dislike the use of numbers to rate people, regardless of whether a man or woman does it, I at least understand the general point of what the OP is asking. Yes, the personality of a person, their intelligence, sense of humor, etc., are far more important than the person's looks...but...generally speaking, some form of physical attractiveness is necessary to be a catalyst in the desire to find out more about those inner qualities. I've never had someone I don't know approach me talking about how 'hot' he thinks my mind is. I would never want my desirability reduced to just the physical, nor would I want to reduce anyone else's down to that, but it is a factor.

In terms of the issue raised in this thread, for myself, a person could be physically attractive to me, but if he doesn't share my interest in regards to this kink, it's a no-go. If the person shares my interest, yes, I do need to be physically attracted to that person, or again, it's not going to work. I'm highly attracted to my play partner both physically, and mentally (in terms of the more abstract qualities like intelligence, humor, etc), with or without the kink aspect, but the fact that I'm attracted to him, and he shares this kink is a definite plus. On the other side of this question, I would never want to be with someone who only found me attractive because I'm ticklish. If I don't 'do it' for that person in the looks department, or in the intelligence, or sense of humor dept, etc., then I would not want that person to be with me. All aspects of the relationship or the play partnership could be fantastic, but if I knew for a fact that the other person was not attracted to me, and was basing their interest solely on my ticklishness and desire to play, I would not continue seeing them. Also, in regards to whether this goes for a relationship or just someone I would be having a one-time session with...I am absolutely not a fan of the 'one-off' session type of situation. Playing with someone for me is a very vulnerable experience, and it is not something I enjoy doing with someone I'm not going to see on a regular basis, or something I want to do with someone who only wants a one-time experience with me. A good play partnership takes time to develop, to learn each other, and what you like and don't like, what works and what doesn't. If I can't see myself potentially having a longer relationship with someone I am playing with, that's not going to work. Likewise, if the other person does not view me as someone they would want to have a relationship with, I would opt-out of playing with them.

 

[wolfwallstreet]

I think ticklisness I need more of. Looks help though

 

[ArchNemesis]

First off, I realize I may not be the intended target audience the OP wanted to answer this thread, but I do find it interesting. While I dislike the use of numbers to rate people, regardless of whether a man or woman does it, I at least understand the general point of what the OP is asking. Yes, the personality of a person, their intelligence, sense of humor, etc., are far more important than the person's looks...but...generally speaking, some form of physical attractiveness is necessary to be a catalyst in the desire to find out more about those inner qualities. I've never had someone I don't know approach me talking about how 'hot' he thinks my mind is. I would never want my desirability reduced to just the physical, nor would I want to reduce anyone else's down to that, but it is a factor.

In terms of the issue raised in this thread, for myself, a person could be physically attractive to me, but if he doesn't share my interest in regards to this kink, it's a no-go. If the person shares my interest, yes, I do need to be physically attracted to that person, or again, it's not going to work. I'm highly attracted to my play partner both physically, and mentally (in terms of the more abstract qualities like intelligence, humor, etc), with or without the kink aspect, but the fact that I'm attracted to him, and he shares this kink is a definite plus. On the other side of this question, I would never want to be with someone who only found me attractive because I'm ticklish. If I don't 'do it' for that person in the looks department, or in the intelligence, or sense of humor dept, etc., then I would not want that person to be with me. All aspects of the relationship or the play partnership could be fantastic, but if I knew for a fact that the other person was not attracted to me, and was basing their interest solely on my ticklishness and desire to play, I would not continue seeing them. Also, in regards to whether this goes for a relationship or just someone I would be having a one-time session with...I am absolutely not a fan of the 'one-off' session type of situation. Playing with someone for me is a very vulnerable experience, and it is not something I enjoy doing with someone I'm not going to see on a regular basis, or something I want to do with someone who only wants a one-time experience with me. A good play partnership takes time to develop, to learn each other, and what you like and don't like, what works and what doesn't. If I can't see myself potentially having a longer relationship with someone I am playing with, that's not going to work. Likewise, if the other person does not view me as someone they would want to have a relationship with, I would opt-out of playing with them.

To me, women are way too uptight about the whole rating women's looks with a number thing. I think of it like this: if a woman is a 10/10, that means that 10 average men out of 10 would most likely be willing to have sex with her, based on physical looks alone, if given the opportunity. At work during the world cup, I heard several women talk about how hot the soccer players were. In other words, if they were single and the opportunity was there, they would have sex with those guys. So, women do it too. They may not put numbers on their physical appearance, but exclaiming that they're "hot" certainly doesn't mean they must have great personalities. It means they would have sex with them if given the opportunity.

 

[chevyhs]

For me, ticklishness is attractiveness. It's her willingness to be playful and sexy. A ticklish woman that is playful and indulges me tickle fetish is leaps and bounds more desirable than a hot woman who isn't ticklish. If she indulges my foot fetish then that is a huge plus. I met a woman that was ok but had a thing against her feet and wasn't ticklish and honestly it didnt work. A woman that understands and enjoys being tickled and enjoys making you happy is how it should be. There are worse fetishes and things that one could have so tickling and making your woman smile and happy should be allowed more

 

[Torturer]

7 looks and 8 ticklishness for me.
As a matter of fact the physical looks has to respond to a few simple things: the girl doesn't have to be overweight and she must have tiny pale pedicured feet. All ther rest is about her ticklishness, her laughters and her way of beggin me to stop, cause tickling without begs is like summer without sun...

 

[Bohemianne]

To those (who don't look good at all) who input higher score for looks, just make sure that you don't have inferiority complex, lol. Otherwise, this whole thing is just another fantasy baloney.

 

[06Alphaman]

This thread is interesting. I'm not sure which issues to address or respond to. I guess I will start with whatever my response to the original OP is.

So for me, it is a case by case basis. Any combination of things can be attractive to me. So it depends on the combination. The chemistry as well.

I like pretty women. I like pretty feet. I like women who are hella ticklish. But in terms of a mate or partner, none of these are things I "need".

 

[06Alphaman]

But the issues raised here are interesting. I understand some of them. I think some of the reactions are also overblown. Men objectify women to one extent or another. Women do to. Whether that applies to personal relationships or not is quite another thing. But for attraction and sexual attraction, I would argue that men and women engage in some sort of evaluation of attractiveness. It might not be a polite topic to discuss. But it is a fact of life IMO.

Another thing that is interesting to me is that I think I know of many women who would be rated a10, and others that I know personally...who I would almost never be attracted to sexually or pursue or accept sex related attention from. I don't operate on looks alone. Besides that, personality and intelligence are important to me. It works both ways too. There are personalities and behaviors that are just unattractive, even with a beautiful person. And there are personalities and behaviors that are very attractive...almost regardless of the physical appearance of a person. For me, there is no real way to "rate"...because it always depends on a combination of things.

I think for me that there has to be some manner of physical attraction to a woman for me to think about her in terms of sexual attraction or pursuit. But it doesn't have to be a so-called 10. LOL. And...for me...a woman who is hella ticklish and likes being tickled will be sexually attractive to me. For one, I just like women who have fun and laugh. Second, if that can be part of sexual play...that's pretty good for me. I'll give TMF examples in a minute. Or...since this thread was so contested, I might start another, related thread.

Yeah. Something more fun with low stakes. I think I will call it Types of Laughter that Turn You On.

 

[xiahou_dun]

It is very shallow I know, and when we let our fetish and lusts take control (I mean let's face it, a majority of us men do) all we see is the superficial and men are hard wired for visuals.*
I'm going to bite however. There are two women that I work with in an office setting that I would say are both in the 8-9 region for looks.
One is very naive and generally always happy, very smart too and always helpful. The other is not really a people person. But she's funny and very goofy. Can be a bit sensitive at times too.*
In the feet area happy naive woman is about a 7 in the feet area, they are a little short and a little stubby but she does take good care of her feet and always paints them festive colors. I happen to know she's ticklish too, she's told stories of how her boyfriend would tickle her a lot.*
Funny goofy woman is about an 8 in the feet area. They are a bit bigger, I tend to like longer feet and longer toes idk why, I'm weird I guess. She keeps them in very good condition also but she rarely shows them off. She usually paints them all the same color to match a theme or something. Can't say if she's ticklish or not at all but I would bet she is.
Now if you're asking about a relationship with either of these women? A 10/10 with either of them, any man would be lucky to be in a relationship with them, let alone a man with a foot fetish or tickle fetish.
For just a temporary tickle fling thing (kinda makes it sound like a one night stand though doesn't it?) the only one I would bet on would be the naive bubbly one.*
It's a pretty shallow thing to explain women down to numbers.. But I know in every guys mind, before they have a chance to get to know them, they do.

Also to answer the op, personality and looks are more important to me than feet and general ticklishness

 

[RupertsTales]

(ticklee desirability) = [ (natural cuteness) * [(nubile youth) * (bubbly personality)] ] ^ (ticklishness)


where (natural cuteness) = (fitness) * (petiteness) * (that thing that makes cheerleaders and figure skaters so fucking adorable)

 

[William_the_Ler]

Ticklishness over looks no rating system needed it's just how it is. Not saying I or anyone wants someone they don't find cute. (There's some body for everybody Just might not be a persons cup of tea no need to be offended) but I bet if you find someone isn't ticklish at all and that's what you want it would stop your interest in that person dead in your tracks. NO MATTER HOW FINE THEY ARE.

 

[Brutus]

For me, ticklishness outweighs looks. This is also why I personally feel my interest in tickling is an unhealthy curse of sorts. It doesn't matter how beautiful a woman is (inside or out), if she isn't ticklish I have zero interest. There's just something wrong with that in my opinion, but that's how I'm wired unfortunately. There are many other aspects that I look for in a woman, but not being ticklish is unfortunately an absolute deal breaker.

But to answer the question of the post, it should come as no surprise I've rather have a 7 on the looks scale and a 8 on the ticklish scale. I'd definitely take a 5/10 over 10/5.