Are people becoming more aware of this fetish?

[desperado_flare]

I've been meeting a lot of new people recently and engaging in a few casual, tickle-related activities with them. I'm an attractive guy, so almost every girl who has any tickling-related contact with me enjoys it as innocent flirting (though most enjoy tickling me more than being tickled by me), and never pose any questions when tickling occurs.

Recently though, I've had two girls on separate occasions mention that they find tickling "sexual." One still was fine with tickling and being tickled, but the other seemed very put off by the idea. I've also had around 4 girls mention "tickle-freaks" messaging them on OkCupid, and they playfully tease me about possibly being one of them.

I'll be honest, one of the greatest things about this kink is, in my opinion, that it isn't truly "sexual" by any but the most extreme definitions. It usually involves no genitalia, oral contact, etc. Thus, the idea that people are starting to see it as "sexual" in the traditional sense worries me.

Has anyone else experienced this lately? Or am I just imagining this as a trend?

 

[Studious_Hustler]

I'm interested why you see this "kink," as you call it, as not "truly 'sexual,'" and why you think that's a good thing. After all, many other kinks don't explicitly involve genitalia or oral contact, yet still result in people getting sexually turned on and are considered sexual (if you don't know what I'm talking about, read the fetish articles on wikipedia). What would be the point of having a kink if it wasn't truly sexual? That's the entire point of a kink.

If you're implying that the tickling fetish has an element of perceived innocence to it, well yes. Tickling is often associated with childhood play, and thus, innocence. But there's nothing innocent about tickling people under the guise of childhood fun while secretly being sexually turned on by it. An honest tickle-fetishist should only be happy if the fetish is becoming better known and accepted. Now, if us fetishists are "ruining" the innocent tickling fun of non-fetishists, well, sorry, I guess that's too bad. But judging from the fact that you have a profile on a tickling fetish site, I kind of doubt that it's your issue.

 

[desperado_flare]

I'm interested why you see this "kink," as you call it, as not "truly 'sexual,'" and why you think that's a good thing. After all, many other kinks don't explicitly involve genitalia or oral contact, yet still result in people getting sexually turned on and are considered sexual (if you don't know what I'm talking about, read the fetish articles on wikipedia). What would be the point of having a kink if it wasn't truly sexual? That's the entire point of a kink.

If you're implying that the tickling fetish has an element of perceived innocence to it, well yes. Tickling is often associated with childhood play, and thus, innocence. But there's nothing innocent about tickling people under the guise of childhood fun while secretly being sexually turned on by it. An honest tickle-fetishist should only be happy if the fetish is becoming better known and accepted. Now, if us fetishists are "ruining" the innocent tickling fun of non-fetishists, well, sorry, I guess that's too bad. But judging from the fact that you have a profile on a tickling fetish site, I kind of doubt that it's your issue.

To your first point, I believe that if all fetishes were considered sexual, then literally everything in our world is sexual. Everything can be fetishized, from elbows to watches to spitting to shampoo, but that doesn't make these things sexual in any real (or perhaps I should say broad) way.

They may be sexual to someone with the fetish, but those without the fetish should be as incapable of comprehending how someone can be attracted to tickling as you and I are of comprehending how a man can be stimulated by licking a car's steering wheel. The entire concept of a fetish, in my opinion, is that it thrusts sexuality on something that is inherently not sexual.

As for your second point, increased exposure would be fine if increased understanding came with it. As things are now, our society still sees "fetish" as a scare-word that calls to mind vagrants and sex offenders.

Suck a girl's toes in an intimate setting and she'll moan happily, suck them after you tell her you have a foot fetish and she's likely to be turned off because, while she enjoys the act itself, the word "fetish" creeps her out.

 

[Studious_Hustler]

Suck a girl's toes in an intimate setting and she'll moan happily, suck them after you tell her you have a foot fetish and she's likely to be turned off because, while she enjoys the act itself, the word "fetish" creeps her out.

I think you put it really well here ^ there's nothing wrong with having a fetish, but there may be something wrong with talking about/thinking about it as such. At least in many contexts.

 

[rhiannon]

I'll be honest, one of the greatest things about this kink is, in my opinion, that it isn't truly "sexual" by any but the most extreme definitions. It usually involves no genitalia, oral contact, etc. Thus, the idea that people are starting to see it as "sexual" in the traditional sense worries me.

The thing is - for people with this kink, it IS truly sexual. You can just be sneaky about it because not a lot of people have heard about it. This is what I am always saying - if unsuspecting people knew the tickling causes a sexual reaction, they wouldn't be okay with it.

 

[Comfort Eagle]

The thing is - for people with this kink, it IS truly sexual. You can just be sneaky about it because not a lot of people have heard about it. This is what I am always saying - if unsuspecting people knew the tickling causes a sexual reaction, they wouldn't be okay with it.

Valid, but I think when most people see someone THAT "interested" in tickling, they immediately know what's going on. Very rarely does anyone buy that line of "Oh it's not sexual, I just really, really really really really into it for purely innocent reasons".

 

[rhiannon]

Valid, but I think when most people see someone THAT "interested" in tickling, they immediately know what's going on.

Depending on what you mean with "THAT interested".

 

[Comfort Eagle]

Depending on what you mean with "THAT interested".

It becomes obvious, trust me. People aren't that thick, tickling is a routine thing yes, but when you're a person that does it fairly often and then brings it up in conversation for any extended period it's obvious it's what you're into.

 

[rhiannon]

I doubt people will be that obvious about it. But people who have a kink themselves might be more aware of it. Like me knowing what was going on when my colleague tried forcing a conversation about lactation on me!

 

[desperado_flare]

The thing is - for people with this kink, it IS truly sexual. You can just be sneaky about it because not a lot of people have heard about it. This is what I am always saying - if unsuspecting people knew the tickling causes a sexual reaction, they wouldn't be okay with it.

As I said in my earlier response to Hustler, the reason why they wouldn't be okay with it is because of society's misinformed labeling of "fetishes" as the realm of predators and hardcore deviants.

Tickling someone excessively who isn't aware of the fetish might be annoying to that person, but there's no reason to believe they'd think you're turned on by it. Just as you don't think "this guy has a fetish for hair washing" when he asks you questions about your hair.

If you have a tickling fetish, and I have a tickling fetish, then of course it's better to be honest. We're coming from the same frame of reference, and thus have a better chance of understanding each other.

For interactions with vanillas, keeping the "fetish" or "sexual" aspect out if the mix is absolutely preferable. Tickling does no harm and, in moderation, is likely something they'll enjoy. But the moment the activity is tinged with a hint of deviant sexuality is the moment all of society's irrational fears quickly begin to emerge.

 

[rhiannon]

Just as you don't think "this guy has a fetish for hair washing" when he asks you questions about your hair.

To be honest, a guy that is not a hairstylist and asking me questions about my hair would probably have me thinking right away that he has a fetish in this direction, because I am aware of fetishes more than other people.

Tickling someone excessively who isn't aware of the fetish might be annoying to that person, but there's no reason to believe they'd think you're turned on by it.

Right, vanilla people who have never heard about this fetish won't. Although touching in itself is a pretty obvious sign that someone is into you. Ground rule: if a guy touches a girl without having to do it, he would most likely also have sex with her. Bottom line is though, as soon as more people will hear about this fetish, the more they will be suspicious if someone tickles them, and the more likely they will keep people from casually tickling them.

 

[Mane'o]

IMHO, no people are not becoming more aware. The Internet has just made it easier for those with the fetish to connect.