ACTUALLY nonconsentual videos?!?

[U.N.Owen]

I wanted to try to get a broader discussion going on an issue that worries me greatly, and that has just come up in the videos section. Several people there are proposing that TC make an ACTUALLY nonconsentual video. One even proposes tricking an unsuspecting bondage model, telling her she'll only be tied up, and then tickling her while she genuinely fights and struggles -- he suggests that she could just be tipped an extra bit of money to make it OK.

He also proposes that it be positively ascertained beforehand that she HATES being tickled, so the experience will be SURE to be a horror for her. That's supposed to be a good idea?

This whole idea really, really worries me. My response in that thread (http://www.ticklingforum.com/showthread.php?threadid=15667) is as follows:

"Am I the only one who finds this line of discussion extremely distubring? I mean, a nonconsentual fantasy is all well and good, but to actually LIE to a model, FORCE her into a situation she hasn't agreed to and may hate so a bunch of tickle fans can get off on her torment strikes me as sick.

It would also be extremely illegal. It's called "assault."

I think it's a very VERY bad idea to try to make nonconsentual fantasies REAL. Women are not toys or objects for male desires, to be treated however we please so long as it gives us a cheap thrill.

I find this very, very unsettling."



And so I do. I would like to know what others think about this potentially very dangerous avenue.

 

[Marauder]

You're right - in theory. Actual NC tickling vids would be assault and despicable, aside from giving us all a bad name. But face it - to most males (this includes me sometimes), females are, in fact, toys, at least as long as they can be absolved of personal guilt - like, when chosing fetish videos.

On the other hand - Please. There is no truly non-consentual tickling video out there. Those videos that claim to be NC are cleverly marketed to those that get a kick out of fantasizing about true tickle-torture of unwilling victims. This target audience includes me, by the way, even though I didn't actually buy one of those vids. It's all fantasy stuff. It's impossible to do a NC video if your company is easily tracked down. The only video that would have a chance of being truly NC would be the tickling equivalent of a snuff-film - grainy quality, shot in a garage out in the backwoods with an old beta-cam, and distributed on usenet exclusively. (Ever wonder how many people would get a kick out of downloading a clip where the victim is really, honestly tickled to death? I bet it would be hundreds on the first day alone...)
Every producer that is established or can easily be tracked down will never produce something that could, and WOULD, lead to a devastating lawsuit for assault and battery. No matter what you pay a model after tickling her against her will - If she sues, she can easily make 1000 times that, and send her tormentors to the big house to boot. She has proof, after all - the tape. And look! It's even marketed as non-consentual! Actually, if I were a model starring in a faux NC vid, I'd say "Fuck it" and just sue the producers for the hell of it. How are they going to proof that it wasn't, in fact, assault when they advertised with the fact? Heh.

Where was I? Oh yeah, in the shower. Time to go dry myself off. Taa, all.

 

[mabus]

agree...

Yeah, I agree. I seem to be a rarity in that I enjoy tickling because I like to see people happy and laugh. In tickling, people laugh. Some say they hate it, some love. I prefer to see someone who loves it being tickled. The stories I like are the ones where the person secretly wants to be tickled.

These video companies claim they have a LOSS everytime they make a video. Everyone is always asking for a REAL non-consensual tickling video. Why would they risk losing tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars just to make a few people happy? And not that many poeple would want to buy a video where the girl is uncomfortable or really trying to get away? It would be disturbing, to say the least. Heck, what is the biggest complaint against videos? The models are faking it, not ticklish at all. They're not even enjoying it.... The videos where the model says "no" over and over again are awful. And they're getting PAID to do it! The ones where the model is like, "huh, what am I doing here? Where's my check?" Awful.

About the toys things, that may be true to an extent, but come one... the one dimensional bad guys who are there to be blown away by the action hero so we can laugh at their pain deaths is more exploititive. They all get paid well for it, so they're not complaining.

 

[DungeonMaster]

Consent

Let it be known that all video productions we engage in or are related to are consensual, with before and after footage to prove it.
The use of a SAFE word is an absolute must! I would never allow any bondage/tickling activity to go on in my presence without the use of a safe word, it is much too dangerous. Only an irresponsible fool would do this. I know TC videos well and can report that it is not possible that they would even consider it.
Sincerely, DungeonMaster.

 

[LEB]

Here's something I was thinking about along these lines:

A lot of people who watch tickling videos fantasise that they are watching NC tickling. Most stories that people write are NC as well, to a much greater degree as it's all made up, so easier to do.

I've been checking out tickling videos, stories etc on the net for about 5 years, and with the exception of the Paradise Vision video, have never seen NC tickling mentioned as far as videos go.

Even though everyone's against it in principle, I would have thought there'd be some people who'd actually make videos that they then put on the net.

You hear about people who film/photograph child porn, and sites with thousands of images etc, but in 5 years no-one's ever made a NC tickling clip? Surely that can't be the case? Has anyone ever seen or even heard of a NC clip?

Or are things like that even more secretive then child pornography, and only known to a select few people who are involved in it?

With all the thousands of NC stories floating around, do we think that no NC videos have ever been made in places like Thailand (no offence to anyone from there) where laws might be somewhat slacker or not enforced?

Or is it so amazingly secret that we just never come across it?

What does everyone think?

LEB

 

[siamese dream]

fantasy non-consentual? (as in, stories or in-your-head fantasies): Sure

REAL nonconsentual? No way!

If the story got into the mainstream media somehow that there was a porn video of someone getting tied up and tickled against their will, those responsible for the video would probably end up behind bars for a very long time, or in a padded cell...

I would be careful about even mentioning some things on the internet, especially anything related to pedophilia. Big brother is watching.

by the way, I would never let anyone tickle me who only thought of me as a "toy".

 

[NYCity]

On the other hand - Please. There is no truly non-consentual tickling video out there. Those videos that claim to be NC are cleverly marketed to those that get a kick out of fantasizing about true tickle-torture of unwilling victims.

I beg to differ. I do not condone NC's other than in fantasy, but I believe Footparadise's Non-consensual is the real deal (the first one, I never saw the second one.) You may disagree, but if it's fake, that girl deserves an Oscar.

 

[MadKalnod]

This is a feeling I'm familiar with. Mad Kalnod's Sixth Law states: "I am never ashamed of who I am or what I do. However, I am often ashamed of the people I am forced to do it with." As a Sci-Fi Geek, I get embarrassed by the borderline schizophrenics who insist upon wearing Starfleet uniforms to work and calling themselves "Lieutenant Commander" in everyday conversation. As a Conservative, I am often mortified by the Theocratic cuckoos in the Republican party nest who think God wants them to firebomb abortion clinics in the name of respecting life. And here, every now and again, I see posts from certain individuals (you know who they are) repeatedly asking to see Jeff injure and even kill his models, Exhibit A, Exhibit B, and otherwise gleefully anticipating the death of the 'lee Exhibit C, and I begin to wonder why I look anywhere except the General Discussion Forum anymore. I really begin to think we have two entirely different incompatible fetishes cohabitating around here. I sometimes feel like a sheepdog suspisciously eyeing the wolves and coyotes: Even if we are all dogs at the genetic level, I have no intention of letting the flock become a free buffet.

Mad Kalnod's Fifth Law states: "Any man who makes a woman cry ought to be defenestrated." I have spoken at length on the useful purpose served by fantasy stories and videos, in the aid of keeping one's darker impulses bound into a medium where they cannot actually harm anyone. As long as you keep it restricted to the world of fantasy, I don't have a problem with your creating it. For me, tickling is an expression of love and affection, or at the very least infatuation, but I understand the BDSM approach of making it a Role-Playing Game about trust and control. But I cannot condone taking an actual unsuspecting innocent and genuinely harming her for sexual gratification. If you really want a video where someone is actually hurt (don't give me that "It's only tickling" crap, you use the word "Torture" and "Torment" to desribe the act), and are seriously posing a request to the video producers and their models who frequent this forum to make it a reality; then there is no other way to put this: You are a sick and dangerous individual. You are a Freak and a Monster, and I recoil in horror from such a soulless abomination. What you are asking for is RAPE, whether it is done with the fingers or the genitals, and there is no justification for it. If the need to hurt innocents is so hardwired into your psychosexual makeup that you would propose such a scheme without a trace of remorse for the victims of your desires, then I would gladly take a garden trowel to your frontal lobes myself in order to protect the women you long to rape. You are not welcome in my presence. Filth.

I am fully aware that these remarks may be deleted as inflammatory, but I stand by them. I am mortally offended, even enraged, by the sentiments in some of the posts cited above by Owen and myself, so I don't really have a lot of sympathy if they cry hurt feelings now. The certainly don't care about the feelings of the women they're so eager to see raped (indeed, hurting women is the whole point of their exercise); what makes them so special that they deserve the compassion they won't display to their intended victims?

 

[SuperTickler]

Jeez, calm down! I don't recall any posts asking Jeff to kill his models! "Defenestration," "freak," "monster," "abomination," "rape," "filth"...MadKalnod's Sixth Law, MadKalnod's Fifth Law...what, are you handing down the Ten Commandments on Mt. Sinai? Some people are really full of themselves!

I don't condone tickle-torturing an unsuspecting victim either, but there has to be a better way to express yourself in a public forum than this!

 

[U.N.Owen]

Wow. First time a thread I started got any attention.

Still, this is a rather serious issue. People fantasizing about forced tickling is harmless. People urging it to be put into actual practice is a very different matter.

Kudos, MadKalnod, for your excellent definition of terms: RAPE is indeed the right word. Kidnapping and assault also seem appropriate.

I realize many people may think this is a non-issue, since no one REALLY would do this. But even the suggestion is dangerous. AND, of course, Paradise claims they HAVE done it. I hope and believe that is a load of dingoes' kindeys, but if it WAS done the "model" should have gone to the police.

And, Supertickler, I must defend MadKalnod. In my personal opinion, his indignation is entirely justified. I don't think any of his vocabulary is out-of-line to a genuine or would-be "tickle rapist." Nor do I think he is pompous, or trying to lay down commandments upon us. It is obvious that his "laws" are for his own guidance and a statement of his own moral code. Furthermore, I happen to think defenestration too good for anyone who assaults a woman. Lastly, MK backed up his claims about what people had said by linking to the threads in question.

 

[redway10]

I agree with SuperTickler

I agree with SuperTickler on this (not the first time).

Nearly all of my tickling fantasies are non-consensual, and I am tired of reading about the evils of such interests on this forum.

Labels like "Assault" and "Rape" do a real injustice to real "Assault" and "Rape", even though tickle torturing an unwilling victim would most likely be considered a crime.

How many noble people on this forum have NEVER tickled someone without getting their permission first (e. g. squeezing someone's ribs with your fingers from behind or tickling a younger (or older?) sibling)?

Given the opportunity to tickle-torture some unwilling victim, I would probably decline. On the other hand, I would probably buy a video of this nature without feeling that I am supporting crime.

 

[redway10]

One other thing...

I do feel that Mad Kalnod's remarks ARE inflammatory and unnecesarily self-righteous. I am glad that laws 1 through 4 were not listed and elaborated upon.

 

[guitman69]

There is a HUGE difference between "squeezing someone's ribs with your fingers from behind or tickling a younger (or older?) sibling" and tying someone down, and torturing them for an extended period of time. To say these acts are the same is like saying that sneaking up on a girl and giving her a kiss is the same thing as raping her. One is meant as a show of affection, the other is meant to cause trauma.

 

[Marauder]

MadKalnods remarks were justified. The only people who'd feel attacked by them really need to get their head checked. Come on - do you REALLY want a genuine NC video? Have some restraint, calm down, drink some cocoa, read a good story.

And tickling against someone's will is similar to rape if done for long enough to produce a video.

Cheers, Kalnod, mate!

 

[SuperTickler]

...Lastly, MK backed up his claims about what people had said by linking to the threads in question.

Well, gosharootie, I don't know how I missed these incredibly literate, well-written and deeply philosophical posts by derekwa! Though I must've seen one of them, as there is what I think to be a somewhat sensible reply by me. Or, perhaps, I just gave these posts the credibilty they deserved, which was zero!

All right, you guys all got your "sensitivity" points from the women in the Forum so you can count on them responding to your IMs in the chatroom. All this bile over something that hasn't even happened...sheesh! Don't you guys have any REAL issues in your lives to deal with?

 

[CDFGA]

So does that mean the companies that advertice "Truly nonconsentual" videos (there are at least 2 on here) are guilty of false advertising? It looks that way to me.

 

[MadKalnod]

Nearly all of my tickling fantasies are non-consensual, and I am tired of reading about the evils of such interests on this forum.

I didn't say the fantasy was evil. The fantasy serves a purpose by providing a release so that it doesn't become reality. It is the attempt to make it reality, as cited in the links provided, that is evil. It's the refusal to distinguish fantasy from reality that is the focus of complaint in this thread.

Also, has it not ocurred to you that those of us who do not share your fantasies are tired of being told that yours are the only game in town?

Labels like "Assault" and "Rape" do a real injustice to real "Assault" and "Rape", even though tickle torturing an unwilling victim would most likely be considered a crime.

So you admit it is wrong. We are talking about forcing a woman to submit to an act that is traumatic to her, against her will, solely for another's gratifactaion. If that isn't rape, what is it? It certainly isn't a display of affection. There is no room for classification by degree here. By your logic, does calling the theft of a GMC Pacer Grand Theft Auto do an injustice to "real" cases of Grand Theft Auto where Porsches and Rolls Royces were stolen?

How many noble people on this forum have NEVER tickled someone without getting their permission first (e. g. squeezing someone's ribs with your fingers from behind or tickling a younger (or older?) sibling)?

Yes, I have tickled people without getting permission forms signed in triplicate first. As a rule, they were mere seconds in duration, with someone I knew as opposed to total strangers, and meant in the spirit of mutual enjoyment. I at no point restrained them to a bondage setup. If they did not like the experience, I stopped the instant they said so. I did not continue tickling them against their wishes on the grounds that their well-being was irrelevant next to my sexual satisfaction. I did not film it and sell images of their humiliation and violation to eager customers. You attempt to confuse the issue. The difference between the kind of willful infliction of discomfort upon an unwilling victim for a prolonged length of time (as long as a video, to be precise) with a willful disregard for their feelings in a unilateral pursuit of pleasure which is under scrutiny here; and the kind of brief playful surprise tickles used as an expression of affection between equals which you cite is, in the words of Larry Miller "like the difference between shooting a bullet and just throwing it."

Given the opportunity to tickle-torture some unwilling victim, I would probably decline. On the other hand, I would probably buy a video of this nature without feeling that I am supporting crime.

Interesting that you say "Probably" decline. Not "Certainly" decline. Not "Definitely" decline. Not "Unquestionably" decline. The use of the word "Probably" implies that you might actually do it under certain circumstances, or at the very least, have to think a little longer than seven breaths about whether or not your having an orgasm justified touching someone in a way they did not like or want to to be touched. Very interesting and revealing indeed. Would you buy a snuff film (if such things existed) without feeling that you were supporting a murder? "No, I might not commit the crime myself, but I'd gladly pay to watch someone else do it for me?".

I do feel that Mad Kalnod's remarks ARE inflammatory and unnecesarily self-righteous.

And I feel that only a criminal would get offended when a criminal act is condemned. Methinks thou doth protest too much. If you think my earlier statement denouncing selfish rapists was some sort of personal attack directed at you, well, someone must have a guilty conscience. If the shoe fits...

I am glad that laws 1 through 4 were not listed and elaborated upon.

Mad Kalnod's Four Laws Governing All Political, Religious, and Sexual Behavior:
Law #1: Are you hurting anyone? No? Fine with me.
Law #2: Is it preventing you or others from meeting their responsibilities? No? Fine with me.
Law #3: Are you demanding that others participate whether they want to or not? No? Fine with me.
Law #4: Are you doing it in the streets if it's liable to frighten the horses and small children? No? Fine with me.

Wow, they're so harsh and draconian and intolerant, aren't they? Yup, human beings shouldn't be expected to live up to such an unattainable ideal. It's clearly too much to ask that people behave like civilized adults and act with consideration for the needs of others.

 

[dardanos78]

It is dissapointing to see that there are people who would enjoy the actual harm and torture of others as a means of enjoyment. We are all not without our darksides. But our humanity and compassion for all life is what helps to keep that darkness in check. I agree with Madkalnod that such desires should be left to the world of fantasy. It is a healthier way of expressing it, if one feels that they have to.
We throw the word torture around here as if it were nothing, and in most cases it is meant light-heartedly, but what some people are asking to do is actually torture someone. Something that is considered a crime even in wartime, and people are asking for it to be done to an innocent life. I applaud dungeonmaster and the rest of TC for refusing to partake in such an act. I am grateful enough that they provide us with tickling videos, I would never ask them to dilute thier morales just for my amusement.

Lets remember that we all have a really special thing going with this forum. I enjoy being able to express my love of tickling with others here. I would hate to see the forum go just because a few people can't be satisfied with what they have.

Just remember tickling will always be fun, as long as its safe and consentual.

 

[areenactor]

time to chime in...

... i like everyone else have n.c. fantasies. i have a couple heighbors who i'd love to tickle! where is that burgler mask?....
but the reality is that i'm not a criminal, so i will never do it!
another thing i don't understand. why this preoccupation with tickling a woman who hates it? why make tickling a thing to be reviled, and torture? in my life, tickling is a thing of pleasure, and beauty. a past time to be shared, not "DONE TO SOMEONE".
to me laughter, and torture don't go together.
steve
p.s. the things i say are not to make brownie points with any woman on this board. i say them for myself, and to impart my conciderable wisdom.

 

[njjen3953]

You may disagree, but if it's fake, that girl deserves an Oscar.

I totally agree. Those tears were very real and although I really enjoyed watching the video, the end was a bit disturbing.

How about a Consentual NON Consentual with an EXTREMELY ticklish ACTRESS? There have got to be some out there that would be able to do justice to the concept and also be desirable to look at.

Jen

 

[evilqueen]

Since noncon tickling has already been compared to rape, let's compare tickling porn to the kind of rape porn that's available. I have looked at a lot of rape pornsites, and IMO even the most brutal images appear to be staged except when they appear to have originated in a third world country. What's the tip off? Aside from the ethnic look of the people involved, "real" images have the kind of blurry, backwoods-y feel that Marauder suggests would characterize true NC tickling porn. There is also a "not fun" feeling to the image.

Maybe when some enterprising Romanian, Somalian or other realizes there's a market for noncon tickling you'll see real noncon tickling porn. (And that's a big maybe.) I don't believe a producer in the Western world would jeopardize his/her livelihood and freedom to produce real noncon tickling videos - or real rape videos, for that matter. I wouldn't purchase either type.

 

[SuperTickler]

Maybe when some enterprising Romanian, Somalian...

Can't wait for those Somalian tickling videos! D'ya think the URLs www.somaliantickling.com or www.ticklesomalia.com are available?

 

[chase]

GRRRRR!

I have to agree with Owen and Madkalnod on this one. Yes, it's wrong to even suggest this OUTSIDE of fantasy. It's a sore subject for me because I have heard stories from models who have been victimized and taken advantage of by unethical producers. It aint pretty. These women are people, just like you all. And they deserve to be treated with honesty and respect at their jobs, just like you do.

 

[SuperTickler]

Re: GRRRRR!

...And they deserve to be treated with honesty and respect at their jobs, just like you do.

I'm still waiting to be treated with honesty and respect at a job.

 

[Leostar]

NYCITY
You are right, that was a great video!!! I just loved the way she got her feet tickled! God did she beg and laugh! And did you not love it when he pulled of her socks!!! There needs to be much more tapes made like that not less!!!