Real Experience and Question

[BellaRisa]

Bella,

Ya know, I can't really say much more on what I already have... so I will just add this. Just cuz I'm a guy doesn't mean I don't know how my female friends get treated. Guess who has to hear all their stories?

But anyway I respect your opinion and thank you for letting me speak mine. Not all guys are scumbugs, so I speak for the few that are apparently left on the planet.

The tone in your reply to Confessor's post is what had me post in his defense. I agree, you came off very serious on him perhaps due to your own experiences. Again, not all of us are deviant monsters.

Drinking is not an excuse for most everything but he was just chillin' at a party. I guess I just will leave the thread alone now.

And Bella... ummm... my name isn't Logan... I just liked that name cuz it was Wolvie's name and my bro's name.

Well anyway, I'm done now.

DK

Yes DK, I know Logan isn't your name-that's how you introduced yourself to me in email many moons ago. BTW I still have the Batsignal keychain you gave me almost as many moons ago...

At this point, all I have to say is that I thoroughly understand the points you and other guys made, and I can honestly see why you feel that way. I took it seriously because to me (and many women) it IS serious. But I made my points and I'm done, peace

Bella

 

[Wolf]

I didn't realize it was a Family Size Can O' Worms....

Okay, folks, I chimed in on this once before, time for a reprise of sorts. I think I was a bit harsh on our fellow in question, but I was trying to make a point, and I believe he heard our opinions, loud and clear, and responded politely and not at all defensively. Scrolling back across the replies, some casual and callous, some idignant, and some downright bitter, I think we've all overshot the mark bit here.
We all very strong opinions in this matter, because few things have as strong effect on us as our own sexual fetishes. I don't know about you folks, but every time I hear about some idiot "toe-licking bandit" or "shoe-sniffing burglar" it makes me just a little bit queasy. It reflects badly on all of us with "harmless" fetishes when someone with something similar takes it way too far. It's embarassing. I think maybe that's what set so many people off this time.
It takes a long time for us XY chromosome types to learn that women have very different perceptions of their bodies, and their personal space, than we're taught from MTV and Maxim magazine. A woman doesn't take her shoes off for the sole (hyuck hyuck) purpose of being tickled; some women's shoes are diabolically uncomfortable. Not that I'd know personally....
A bare midriff, even from my stilted perspective, doesn't mean she wants her tummy touched; it could mean that she just lost some weight, and is being a little braver about her body, or maybe she just broke up with a clod who said she was fat. You wanna know the turth about what really goes on in women's minds? YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!
So, here's my revised opinion about what Confessor did. He got drunk, saw an oppportunity, and made an error in judgement. I don't believe he meant any harm. He was wrong, but he wasn't bad. And I doubt he'd do it again without some serious thought beforehand, and that's all you can ask. So, Confessor, please consider yourself excused from the following rant.

Featherdfingers, you're obviously an intelligent person, and thus, one whom I should refrain from engaging in a debate, but I have to take issue with your reply to Sunrise.

No matter how hard you can try to convince yourself otherwise, physical connections have always been -- and always will be -- two-way streets. Otherwise, you would never agreed to be tied up. Otherwise, people would always have to have other people's permission before going in for the kiss -- and really -- how much fun is *that*? See, the minute you attempt to fuse relationships and intimacy with rules and control is the very minute you suck all the spontaneity and excitement out of any given romantic situation.

There wasn't a physical or romantic relationship between the two parties in question, was there? Or did I miss one of the posts? Not every relationship between a man and a woman is a romantic or physical, or even remotely possible to be so.

And for the record, I think it would be beneficial as a race, we could finally admit that the biggest difference between "creeps" and "hunks" is all a matter of perspective. By some random sparks of the universe, we just so happen to find the behavior of certain people more appealing (or perhaps less digusting) than others -- one woman's creep is another woman's hunk. And as long as there is hot, passionate sex going on between women and their "hunks", there is also going to be sexual abuse between women and "creeps." And the truth is, the difference between the two is really a lot slimmer than most people would like to admit.

There is a huge difference between flirting and sexual abuse, and minimizing it by calling it a matter of perspective is a specious argument. "Sexual abuse" happens when a "creep" doesn't realize, or doesn't care, that the woman doesn't think of him as a "hunk" (who uses that word anymore?) and does what he wants anyway. A creep is considered a creep not because of some cosmological hiccup, but because HE ACTS LIKE A CREEP! Blaming someone's lack of hunkiness on "random sparks of the universe" is rather demeaning to women, don't you think? "It can't be that they're right in figuring out who's creepy, it's gotta be the universe.." Women make plenty of mistakes in choosing mates, as we all know, but Chaos has nothing to do with it.
Men who are attractive to women can be that way for many different reasons, just as there are many different women. Once you learn that, you may figure out that the difference between "hunks" and "creeps" is far from some quirk in the cosmos. The difference is in who you are.



*Whew* Okay, I'm done.


Wolf

 

[ticklemebreezy]

Re: DON'T EVER DO THAT WITH ME!

I agree with Bella and Sunrise...it's part of my body whether you like it or not and nobody has the right to touch me without my permission. Sorry Confessor, but if that was me you would have been either kicked in the privates or seriously beaten.

 

[ticklemebreezy]

Re: Just doing that thing I do by playing the devil's advocate...

Interesting points you have all made, no real clear-cut right and wrong answers (as always)...

I agree with you here, there have been many great points made, but as everyone is entitled to their opinions, right now I have to give mine. I hope nobody reads this wrong because I am not into starting flamewars.

First of all, I don't see what another male's opinion has to do with tickling a girl.

If you are pertaining to when Confessor tickled that woman and his friend stepped in and moved him away, I think that is a very important thing to have. It has already been stated that he was saving Confessor from making himself look worse than he has already made himself to be and from saving that woman (that his friend liked). If a friend of mine and I were in the same/similar position, I would do the same thing, but not as harsh as "shoving" him/her out of there.

If I am going to tickle a girl, I don't poll the entire room before doing going ahead with my action -- I could frankly care less.

And unfortunately, you could find yourself in the same situation as Confessor or with someone like Bella, Sunrise or me or could be even worse. It is different when you have their consent or you know this person before hand, or even if you BOTH have a mutual understanding and you like each other to take things one step further. I admit that it is a conversation starter in more than one way (good or bad) and it may help break the ice so to speak. But you do have to remember that there is a line that you are crossing and things could go awry. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that it is the right thing to do and it is not the best thing to do...atleast Confessor started a conversation with the woman first, but he did cross that *personal space* line that EVERY person has. He touched her and he is lucky that she nor someone else decked him on the second or third tickle. It doesn't matter if she DIDN'T tell him "don't do that again" she said "no" and no means "no". I am glad that you say what you said in the next paragraph. It helped me to know that you are not a stupid boy, but a VERY smart, intellegent man!

Having said that, the ability to *pull* tickling off is truly all about the attitude. I personally wouldn't have too much of an instinct toward tickling a girl I didn't truly care about (an attitude that has matured very much since my high school years!), but if you really want to tickle a "bitch," a technique of quick tickling, retreating, and smiling has always seemed to work pretty well. As long as you don't get overly antaganistic or obsessive about it, I don't really foresee the girl complaining too much (unless she just *really* didn't like being tickled!).

Which in the beginning conversation that Confessor had with this woman (sorry, I will refrain from calling her a b****, because I don't know this person), she stated that she didn't like to be tickled, according to Confessor's words. That should have been a hint in the first place not to do it besides the other circumstances of *personal space*.

And tickling *is* different from spanking/slapping, because the end result of making someone laugh versus making someone cry (while they do share some similarities in extended, erotic situations) really couldn't be *more* different. And while I agree with you in general about people's personal space being violated, I don't really understand the philosophy behind going to a party and being super uptight about your surroundings. If you want to have your *personal space* stay home. People go to parties to connect with other people. While I admit that this doesn't give every Dick and Jane (hey, it's the 90s! ) due "license to touch," I think you have to at least respect the fact that when people get together in a casual environment, there are going to be physical attempts at flirtation -- and (unfortunately) sometimes these attempts are made even if the attraction isn't necessarily mutual.

If I don't want my *personal space* bothered with, I make my point loud and clear especially if it is pointed at someone that I am clearly not interested in as I am sure other ppl do the same thing. There is such a thing as a *comfort zone*. You should know it especially when you meet and greet new ppl. There is a space inbetween both parties that you feel comfortable in and not violated. It is not right for someone to enter my space and every person has a right to go out in public no matter where it is with their *personal space*. The only time that comfort zone/personal space can be crossed is with a relationship with someone you know, like or love. When I go to a party, restaurant or whatever someone I don't know shouldn't be putting his or her arm around me or entering my zone/area too close until I know and feel comfortable with them. Another thing, when a person, man or woman, is in the beginning of a relationship with someone new, shouldn't that other person respect the word "no" when the man's wondering hands goes up her shirt/down her pants and vise versa?

Again, I don't comprehend this OTHER guy syndrome you keep referring to. On the (extremely rare) occassion that I do tickle an relatively new acquaintance, I usually take her at her own word and judgment. Of course she is probably going to protest with a flurry of "no's" while I'm doing the tickling, which is why it's important to establish some playful-yet-essential banter immediately afterward to see where she stands on the issue of being touched/tickled (i.e. "Hmm...I wonder if I can get away with that again.."). Body language becomes just as important if not more so than verbal language in these situations, as most people -- especially young ones -- are not all that comfortable with publicly acknowledging (or denying) something they might secretly enjoy. Again, I don't see where the guy fits in -- even if it's her boyfriend. While in practice, I probably wouldn't involve myself in such a situation, in theory, there is really nothing wrong with it (can you tell I'm a little shaky on the merits of long-term relationships?). If a girl you meet at a party is enjoying (verbally or non-verbally) your physical contact, I see no reason why it can't continue until proven otherwise.

Another confusing thing here, this girl that you are going to tickle, how well do you know her? Have you seen/met her before? When you are at a party and you have been drinking, alcohol does impair all of your judgements, so how do you know that she wants to be tickled? How can you read her body language the REAL way that she means? What if she has been drinking and she displays the wrong body language...Would you or anyone respect that she might not mean what she feels? I don't want any flame:wars and I hope that I didn't start any, but this is something for everyone to think about. We have all been in situations like this. This "other" guy thing that Bella keeps talking about, I understand what she is saying. There is ALWAYS going to be "another" guy around to defend the girl who is in a situation like this. It could even be her boyfriend, brother or a very well trusted friend that is going to come to her defense whether you know those ppl or not.

That's an interesting point, although it's vaguely relevant. No matter what your gender, relation, race, creed, or color, you still have to learn how to effectively communicate with all types of people -- from gentlemen to scumbags.

This is very true and not one single person will know unless they are in the situation that brings things like this on. This is where your instinct and gut reaction come into play, most importantly "your brain".

In theory, this makes sense. But as someone else perceptively pointed out elsewhere in this thread, it is a natural (and very common) reaction to say "no" and "stop" when being tickled -- hell, most of the ticklees I have talked to in this very forum behave in that exact same way. The key here is the body language and facial reactions afterward -- if the person noticeably pulls away, or gets a genuinely upset look on her face when the tickling has concluded -- she most likely has not enjoyed it. Knowing this, I don't see how a person can continue on with the tickling in good conscience.

A person, man or woman, has the right to say "no" or "stop". They have a right, but if that line is crossed again as in confessor's case, someone also has a right to shove him away and repeat what that person said. The first warning is enough.

Off my soap box now and crawling back into my lurking stage.

 

[Sunriseticklee]

Featherdfingers,
You posted a very interesting rebuttal. And I am going to respectfully inform you that when it comes to me, my views of relationships, and my body, you are pretty much well.... bluntly put, WRONG!

And since your reply was directed toward me, I am going to reply to your post in MY point of view. Please understand and FULLY comprehend that the following information may be something in thought and in theory that you disagree with, however, there really isn't anything to argue about. Hopefully it will be perfectly clear that no matter what YOUR opinion holds, my rules on my body still stands... unwavering. Society may change and mold YOUR values and YOUR morals, but society will NEITHER change nor dictate what I believe in and what I stand for.

Sunrise, the main problem here -- at least as I see it -- is rooted in our country's sociology and culture. Yes, I know it's the new millennium and all that crap, but the fact is, there's still a lot of pressure on guys to make the first move.

Even with times “a changing”, prayerfully there are still men who believe that a first move can be verbal, and really SHOULD be verbal in my opinion. Surely men do, for I can “more easily” forgive an unwanted comment much more quickly than an unwanted touch. So the statement you made above pretty much well… means nothing to me.

So? What if the guy has to make a first move? AND? Your point is? Whatever happened to saying a friendly hello? Talk to me…. Find out what my interests are! You will NEVER get me to believe that society has changed so much that verbal communication is no longer the norm. If that were true, I would be out of a job.

You say, "your body...your rules...your decisions," but that's a bit of a misnomer, especially if you've ever had a boyfriend before (and I know for a fact you have). No matter how hard you can try to convince yourself otherwise, physical connections have always been -- and always will be -- two-way streets. Otherwise, you would never agreed to be tied up.

Interesting…. And thank you for providing what I needed to further prove my point. Let’s think here, shall we? Obviously if I am in a relationship with a guy, he has not only been made aware of my rules and expectations, but he also has agreed to adhere to them… or else, he will find himself girlfriendLESS and quite alone. Obviously permission for some physical affection has been granted or been made off limits for whatever reason. Respect is always an issue and is always the key. If the guy, boyfriend or not, crosses MY LINE… then he can go LINE DANCE with somebody else.

Let me further break it down for you, dear…if I request to be tied up, the bondage does not mean that people have free reign over my body. To be perfectly frank, NO ONE has ever had free reign REGARDLESS of said “relationship”. There are rules… MY RULES. I decide who, when, where, and how. MY rules, MY body, MY decision… PERIOD.

See, the minute you attempt to fuse relationships and intimacy with rules and control is the very minute you suck all the spontaneity and excitement out of any given romantic situation.

This is completely and totally incorrect. Romance and intimacy has thrived since the beginnings of time with rules of respect and etiquette still intact. Call it old-fashioned, but don’t try to convince me that it cannot be done. Romance has not been, nor WILL EVER be quenched by rules and a little thing called SELF CONTROL. It can oftentimes be ENHANCED by those things. If you would allow yourself to truly think about it, instead of maybe trying to think of ways to prove me wrong, there are PLENTY of way to be spontaneous and romantic that aren’t A) physical and B) disrespectful.

By the way, spontaneity is only romantic if it doesn’t make the other person feel uncomfortable, or make the person feel like he/she is being disrespected.

Think about any person you've ever had a crush on...did you ever want him to act like a total gentleman and follow all the rules when it came to exploring your body? Of course not.

WHAT? WHAT? You CAN NOT BE SERIOUS! YOU ARE KIDDING, RIGHT?
Please read your statement out loud over and over and over and over until you can grasp how completely and utterly RIDICULOUS it sounds. In fact… please, take a poll. Ask any woman you want if she DOESNOT want to be treated like a lady… a QUEEN… really.

Of course I want the man to conduct himself like a gentleman. (Who said I was giving guys permission to explore my body anyway? INCORRECT ASSUMPTION) I repeat… OF COURSE I want a man to be a gentleman and treat me like a lady!

Whatever happened to chivalry, respect, gentleness… all of those things that make the male portion of our species still sexy to me? And most of all makes them still worth waiting for? Surely you don’t mean to tell me that society has changed us so much that the ways of the gentleman is dead! (Even if you tried, I would never believe you)

I have never in my life met anyone who was more of a gentleman than General Zod, Double T, Affectionate Dan, MKeemer, and countless others who treat me like a lady each time they come in contact with me.

Another example, I brought my little sister with me to Philly… to PRE-NEST. She is a vanilla, of course, but she met all of my friends and she laughed with them, got silly, joked, teased… hell, she could have gotten butt naked if she wanted to, but EVERYONE knew that she was NOT to be touched. You say it’s all about atmosphere… she was in a room FULL of ticklephiles, knew we were ticklephiles and watched people tickling…. And playing. Did anyone cross that line? NO! In fact there were people (namely Affection Dan, Terorizer and others) who went out of their way to keep my sister safe. And THAT is the way it should always be.

Every guy I have ever had a crush, ever been truly in love with was always a perfect gentleman to me. That is so sexy to me really! My body is NOT an open map made for a boyfriend, acquaintance, or a crush to explore, after all…. What is a boyfriend, really? Just a guy who is sweet and takes me out sometimes? HURRAY! WELL GUESS WHAT? It takes more to get at me than a free meal and a line or two that makes me feel pretty.

I’m speaking honest to goodness facts here, dear. REALITY… and in reality, nothing gets to me more than a gentleman… Open doors for me. Buy me roses… Treat me like a lady. Treat me with the utmost respect. Ask me how I feel…. Ask me if I want to. Am I ready? Is it acceptable? Would you mind if I…? I am the biggest sucker for a good guy (a big good guy.. heehee) And they still exist too! That is what I want and THAT is what I am saving myself for… That’s right… you know that old-fashioned view… of choosing to wait? So OOPSIE… You didn’t know me like you thought you did, did you?

Chances are, if a girl is taking her shoes off, jumping around, and acting goofy, it would lead me to believe she is the kind of free spirit that would be *okay* with a little bit of tickling. Again, by no means is this any sign that it's a god-given right to tie up these free-spirited girls and tickle them senseless, but a poke in the ribs? Goes with the territory, methinks.

In conclusion… my manner may be teasing, flirty ----> MY PERSONALITY… NOT AN INVITAITON! My clothes may be sexy, showy----> MY CREATIVITY…NOT AN INVITATION!

I have a right to be who I am! I have a right NOT to be exposed to whatever guy or girl thinks it cute and funny to reach out and touch me without my consent. And this is whether I am in class, at a club, at a bar, at a party, at church…. MAKE NO MISTAKE!
I am NOT the one and I NEVER will be! ASK ME! Or deal with the consequences.

Live, Laugh and TICKLE
Sunriseticklee



You TELL EM! Ticklemebreezy!

 

[ticklemebreezy]

Yeah baby...

You go girl! I am with you ALL the way!!!!! Man, times like this make me VERY proud to be the woman that I am with MY choices... Move on over, here we come! lol.
Breezy

Featherdfingers,
You posted a very interesting rebuttal. And I am going to respectfully inform you that when it comes to me, my views of relationships, and my body, you are pretty much well.... bluntly put, WRONG!

And since your reply was directed toward me, I am going to reply to your post in MY point of view. Please understand and FULLY comprehend that the following information may be something in thought and in theory that you disagree with, however, there really isn't anything to argue about. Hopefully it will be perfectly clear that no matter what YOUR opinion holds, my rules on my body still stands... unwavering. Society may change and mold YOUR values and YOUR morals, but society will NEITHER change nor dictate what I believe in and what I stand for.



Even with times “a changing”, prayerfully there are still men who believe that a first move can be verbal, and really SHOULD be verbal in my opinion. Surely men do, for I can “more easily” forgive an unwanted comment much more quickly than an unwanted touch. So the statement you made above pretty much well… means nothing to me.

So? What if the guy has to make a first move? AND? Your point is? Whatever happened to saying a friendly hello? Talk to me…. Find out what my interests are! You will NEVER get me to believe that society has changed so much that verbal communication is no longer the norm. If that were true, I would be out of a job.



Interesting…. And thank you for providing what I needed to further prove my point. Let’s think here, shall we? Obviously if I am in a relationship with a guy, he has not only been made aware of my rules and expectations, but he also has agreed to adhere to them… or else, he will find himself girlfriendLESS and quite alone. Obviously permission for some physical affection has been granted or been made off limits for whatever reason. Respect is always an issue and is always the key. If the guy, boyfriend or not, crosses MY LINE… then he can go LINE DANCE with somebody else.

Let me further break it down for you, dear…if I request to be tied up, the bondage does not mean that people have free reign over my body. To be perfectly frank, NO ONE has ever had free reign REGARDLESS of said “relationship”. There are rules… MY RULES. I decide who, when, where, and how. MY rules, MY body, MY decision… PERIOD.



This is completely and totally incorrect. Romance and intimacy has thrived since the beginnings of time with rules of respect and etiquette still intact. Call it old-fashioned, but don’t try to convince me that it cannot be done. Romance has not been, nor WILL EVER be quenched by rules and a little thing called SELF CONTROL. It can oftentimes be ENHANCED by those things. If you would allow yourself to truly think about it, instead of maybe trying to think of ways to prove me wrong, there are PLENTY of way to be spontaneous and romantic that aren’t A) physical and B) disrespectful.

By the way, spontaneity is only romantic if it doesn’t make the other person feel uncomfortable, or make the person feel like he/she is being disrespected.



WHAT? WHAT? You CAN NOT BE SERIOUS! YOU ARE KIDDING, RIGHT?
Please read your statement out loud over and over and over and over until you can grasp how completely and utterly RIDICULOUS it sounds. In fact… please, take a poll. Ask any woman you want if she DOESNOT want to be treated like a lady… a QUEEN… really.

Of course I want the man to conduct himself like a gentleman. (Who said I was giving guys permission to explore my body anyway? INCORRECT ASSUMPTION) I repeat… OF COURSE I want a man to be a gentleman and treat me like a lady!

Whatever happened to chivalry, respect, gentleness… all of those things that make the male portion of our species still sexy to me? And most of all makes them still worth waiting for? Surely you don’t mean to tell me that society has changed us so much that the ways of the gentleman is dead! (Even if you tried, I would never believe you)

I have never in my life met anyone who was more of a gentleman than General Zod, Double T, Affectionate Dan, MKeemer, and countless others who treat me like a lady each time they come in contact with me.

Another example, I brought my little sister with me to Philly… to PRE-NEST. She is a vanilla, of course, but she met all of my friends and she laughed with them, got silly, joked, teased… hell, she could have gotten butt naked if she wanted to, but EVERYONE knew that she was NOT to be touched. You say it’s all about atmosphere… she was in a room FULL of ticklephiles, knew we were ticklephiles and watched people tickling…. And playing. Did anyone cross that line? NO! In fact there were people (namely Affection Dan, Terorizer and others) who went out of their way to keep my sister safe. And THAT is the way it should always be.

Every guy I have ever had a crush, ever been truly in love with was always a perfect gentleman to me. That is so sexy to me really! My body is NOT an open map made for a boyfriend, acquaintance, or a crush to explore, after all…. What is a boyfriend, really? Just a guy who is sweet and takes me out sometimes? HURRAY! WELL GUESS WHAT? It takes more to get at me than a free meal and a line or two that makes me feel pretty.

I’m speaking honest to goodness facts here, dear. REALITY… and in reality, nothing gets to me more than a gentleman… Open doors for me. Buy me roses… Treat me like a lady. Treat me with the utmost respect. Ask me how I feel…. Ask me if I want to. Am I ready? Is it acceptable? Would you mind if I…? I am the biggest sucker for a good guy (a big good guy.. heehee) And they still exist too! That is what I want and THAT is what I am saving myself for… That’s right… you know that old-fashioned view… of choosing to wait? So OOPSIE… You didn’t know me like you thought you did, did you?



In conclusion… my manner may be teasing, flirty ----> MY PERSONALITY… NOT AN INVITAITON! My clothes may be sexy, showy----> MY CREATIVITY…NOT AN INVITATION!

I have a right to be who I am! I have a right NOT to be exposed to whatever guy or girl thinks it cute and funny to reach out and touch me without my consent. And this is whether I am in class, at a club, at a bar, at a party, at church…. MAKE NO MISTAKE!
I am NOT the one and I NEVER will be! ASK ME! Or deal with the consequences.

Live, Laugh and TICKLE
Sunriseticklee



You TELL EM! Ticklemebreezy!

 

[Featherdfingers]

Sunrise...

And since your reply was directed toward me, I am going to reply to your post in MY point of view. Please understand and FULLY comprehend that the following information may be something in thought and in theory that you disagree with, however, there really isn't anything to argue about.

And let me tell, that's just a fantastic attitude to take towards a tickling forum. This place was designed to debate philosophies and points of view. Never in my original post to you did I say you were incorrect/wrong/false in your point of view. But don't get me wrong -- I am calling you and challenging you on your perspectives. To say, "there really isn't anything to argue about" is about the equivalent of rewarding the Stanley Cup Trophy before the Championship Series even takes place. We are all here because there is stuff to argue about -- the world would be a dull place is there wasn't. So chill out, relax, and argue -- but try not to take these things personally!

Even with times “a changing”, prayerfully there are still men who believe that a first move can be verbal, and really SHOULD be verbal in my opinion.

You'll probably be surprised to hear me say that I utterly and totally agree with you on this count. The physical barrier is absolutely the last bridge I personally cross with another person (and at that point, I am usually in a relationship with them). Now, having said that, I don't see anything wrong with running up to a girl you barely know and sharing one very quick, casual tickle with her, at least during the years of one's youth. Again, not really something I've done personally, but why not?? You never know when she might actually respond positively to being tickled! I dunno...perhaps this is best chalked up as a difference between genders? I mean, I would obviously be positively elated to have a strange girl sneak up behind me and tickle me...

Interesting…. And thank you for providing what I needed to further prove my point. Let’s think here, shall we? Obviously if I am in a relationship with a guy, he has not only been made aware of my rules and expectations, but he also has agreed to adhere to them… or else, he will find himself girlfriendLESS and quite alone. Obviously permission for some physical affection has been granted or been made off limits for whatever reason. Respect is always an issue and is always the key. If the guy, boyfriend or not, crosses MY LINE… then he can go LINE DANCE with somebody else.

Let me further break it down for you, dear…if I request to be tied up, the bondage does not mean that people have free reign over my body. To be perfectly frank, NO ONE has ever had free reign REGARDLESS of said “relationship”. There are rules… MY RULES. I decide who, when, where, and how. MY rules, MY body, MY decision… PERIOD.

And now let me break it down completely for you. When you are in a relationship it is a constant state of compromise between two people. In other words, single life = YOUR rules, YOUR body, YOUR decision, and relationships = OUR rules, OUR body, OUR decisions. There are always TWO (and in some open-minded regions, more ) individual people involved in the dating process, so can you please explain to me how when you get involved with someone you still obey by YOUR rules and YOUR decisions? Relationships thrive on a constant state of give-and-take. I agree that there could (and should) be RULES in said relationship, but these are always adapted RULES that evolve out of the individuals' RULES in the beginning. I would question your "MY rules, MY body, MY decision" philosophy to the core in the sense that it doesn't really appear like you're interested in a "true" relationship, rather being yourself while hanging out with someone else. Not that there is anything wrong with that, at all!

By the way, spontaneity is only romantic if it doesn’t make the other person feel uncomfortable, or make the person feel like he/she is being disrespected.

Definitely agreed, although it should be noted that the further someone falls in love with another person, the further this sense of discomfort tends to recede.

Whatever happened to chivalry, respect, gentleness… all of those things that make the male portion of our species still sexy to me? And most of all makes them still worth waiting for? Surely you don’t mean to tell me that society has changed us so much that the ways of the gentleman is dead! (Even if you tried, I would never believe you)

That's not really what I meant, at all. And of course there is still such thing as gentlemen!

Every guy I have ever had a crush, ever been truly in love with was always a perfect gentleman to me. That is so sexy to me really! My body is NOT an open map made for a boyfriend, acquaintance, or a crush to explore, after all….

That makes sense to me. Although it must be said, that for some women (I would say "most," but I sure as heck don't have the statistical data to back that up! ), the idea of having their bodies acting as open maps for their boyfriends is a very sexy concept, indeed!

I’m speaking honest to goodness facts here, dear. REALITY… and in reality, nothing gets to me more than a gentleman… Open doors for me. Buy me roses… Treat me like a lady. Treat me with the utmost respect. Ask me how I feel…. Ask me if I want to. Am I ready? Is it acceptable? Would you mind if I…? I am the biggest sucker for a good guy (a big good guy.. heehee) And they still exist too! That is what I want and THAT is what I am saving myself for… That’s right… you know that old-fashioned view… of choosing to wait? So OOPSIE… You didn’t know me like you thought you did, did you?

Of course I'm familiar with the "old-fashioned view" of choosing to wait. As a matter of fact (gratuitious personal disclosure here), it's a lifestyle I actually subscribe to, myself. But I'm not naive enough to believe all women want good guys, either. There's a definite appeal to the grittier, edgier personality that I can certainly understand.

In conclusion… my manner may be teasing, flirty ----> MY PERSONALITY… NOT AN INVITAITON! My clothes may be sexy, showy----> MY CREATIVITY…NOT AN INVITATION!

You can say that as many ways as you want (it already looks like you have quite a nifty jingle laid out there...), but the simple fact remains that certainly personalties and (lack of) clothing are going to lead to more aggressive behavior from the opposite sex. Again, I am not saying it is right -- believe me when I say that desperate behavior by guys *almost* upsets me as much as it upsets you. The simple point I was trying to make last time was that it is not illegal for a guy attending the same party as a girl to sneak up behind a her and give her a quick tickle -- the day something like that becomes outlawed is the day I'll voluntarily die. By the same token, by choosing to perform such an action, that guy is also runs the risk of paying a price (whether it be physical, verbal, or otherwise) for such a decision.

 

[Krokus]

heh...

I think it is so funny how women think they have so much power these days....Anyhow, If my "buddy" advanced on me and pushed me away, I would kick his ass.


My take on the "My clothes may be sexy but, im just being myself!!" stuff, that is the biggest load of crap I have ever heard. If a woman dresses sexy, I WILL look at her. If she has a problem, she can let me know. Im sorry, but you can't sit in front of a fuckin' mirror for 4 hours and not expect me to look at you. I will look at whoever I please, thank you.

-By the way Sunrise, thats awesome! Why don't you just tell us your whole life story. . .


I don't know...since when did being a woman mean that you can constantly kiss you own ass to make yourself feel better?? Whenever im down, I don't stand up and say, "IM A MAN!! HEAR ME ROAR!!" Jesus...I just get sick of that shit.


And as far as the gentleman shit goes, I am glad that our society has changed, because the way I see it, I will treat you with the amount of respect you treat me with. YOU?? GETTING SPECIAL TREATMENT CAUSE' YOUR A WOMAN?!?!? I don't friggin' think so. I live on a place called earth, where all humans are supposed to be equal. You have arms, you can open the damn door. And don't forget to close it behind you, cause I can open my own doors. Treat others the way you want to be treated. That is my outlook on the whole Man Woman thing. If you want a gentleman, go back to 1950.


-Your just like everyone else, just cause your a woman, does NOT mean your too good to touch.

 

[Featherdfingers]

Krokus wrote:
I think it is so funny how women think they have so much power these days....Anyhow, If my "buddy" advanced on me and pushed me away, I would kick his ass.

Glad I'm not the only one that found this to be a bit odd. I'm happy to say I don't have any "buddies" that take matters into their own hands by shoving me in the name of protecting a "fair damsel in [tickling] distress."

Then again, I always was a subscriber of the "bros before hos" theory throughout most of my college career.

 

[Sunriseticklee]

Re: heh...

I think it is so funny how women think they have so much power these days....Anyhow, If my "buddy" advanced on me and pushed me away, I would kick his ass.


My take on the "My clothes may be sexy but, im just being myself!!" stuff, that is the biggest load of crap I have ever heard. If a woman dresses sexy, I WILL look at her. If she has a problem, she can let me know. Im sorry, but you can't sit in front of a fuckin' mirror for 4 hours and not expect me to look at you. I will look at whoever I please, thank you.

-By the way Sunrise, thats awesome! Why don't you just tell us your whole life story. . .


I don't know...since when did being a woman mean that you can constantly kiss you own ass to make yourself feel better?? Whenever im down, I don't stand up and say, "IM A MAN!! HEAR ME ROAR!!" Jesus...I just get sick of that shit.


And as far as the gentleman shit goes, I am glad that our society has changed, because the way I see it, I will treat you with the amount of respect you treat me with. YOU?? GETTING SPECIAL TREATMENT CAUSE' YOUR A WOMAN?!?!? I don't friggin' think so. I live on a place called earth, where all humans are supposed to be equal. You have arms, you can open the damn door. And don't forget to close it behind you, cause I can open my own doors. Treat others the way you want to be treated. That is my outlook on the whole Man Woman thing. If you want a gentleman, go back to 1950.


-Your just like everyone else, just cause your a woman, does NOT mean your too good to touch.

Krokus... the funny thing about it is.... from seeing the glorious respect YOU generate from the forum folks, I am not at all surprised at your reply.

THE REST MY POST WAS EDITED (first time for everything).... LOL SO WHATEVER Especially seeing some of the threads up here that are NOT edited.... Guess some folks are more free to speak their minds than others.

But bottom line... I really don't take your thoughts on my opinion seriously Krokus. La Dee DA... Snooze CITY. (Is that a sweeter way to say what I said eariler? I hope so... *insert pansy here, the flower of course *)

Live, Laugh and TICKLE
Sunrise


PS... Funny... I always get special attention because I am a woman. And because... well, I do treat most people with a special kind of "love". It just works out that way. Pretty cool too. Kind of seperates the line of guys who get play and the guys who get no play... ever. LOL

 

[Sunriseticklee]

Re: Sunrise...

And now let me break it down completely for you. When you are in a relationship it is a constant state of compromise between two people. In other words, single life = YOUR rules, YOUR body, YOUR decision, and relationships = OUR rules, OUR body, OUR decisions. There are always TWO (and in some open-minded regions, more ) individual people involved in the dating process, so can you please explain to me how when you get involved with someone you still obey by YOUR rules and YOUR decisions? Relationships thrive on a constant state of give-and-take. I agree that there could (and should) be RULES in said relationship, but these are always adapted RULES that evolve out of the individuals' RULES in the beginning. I would question your "MY rules, MY body, MY decision" philosophy to the core in the sense that it doesn't really appear like you're interested in a "true" relationship, rather being yourself while hanging out with someone else. Not that there is anything wrong with that, at all!

There are certain things I will not argue about. My morals are one of them. Sort of like... It is what it is so... oh well. After saying it once or twice... People know it won't change so why argue about it? That is what I was saying. By the way... Thanks for the trophy.


When I get into a serious relationship..... I don't mind compromising about simple things like dinner, the weather, who washes the dishes (him LOL) things like that. Maybe there is an argument.... We can compromise. But more than likely, I will not compromise my body and that is the topic of discussion. We are talking violation of privacy/ respect in a physical sense. I think I am worth waiting for... Plain and simple. And when I am ready, that is when "things" will happen. Until then.... INSERT JINGLE HERE

And at this time, I'm not interested in getting in a serious relationship. Wrong location, wrong time. If love jumps out and bites me in the butt... I am going to be soooo mad. LOL *franticly fans cupid away!* But that's me.

You can say that as many ways as you want (it already looks like you have quite a nifty jingle laid out there...), but the simple fact remains that certainly personalities and (lack of) clothing are going to lead to more aggressive behavior from the opposite sex. Again, I am not saying it is right -- believe me when I say that desperate behavior by guys *almost* upsets me as much as it upsets you. The simple point I was trying to make last time was that it is not illegal for a guy attending the same party as a girl to sneak up behind a her and give her a quick tickle -- the day something like that becomes outlawed is the day I'll voluntarily die. By the same token, by choosing to perform such an action, that guy is also runs the risk of paying a price (whether it be physical, verbal, or otherwise) for such a decision.

It may not be illegal... and its all cutesy to us because we are part of the OH SO INNOCENT NOT AS BAD AS THE OTHERS TICKLE FETISH CLUB! But when a girl says no.... clearly... She isn't laughing... Doesn't think it is cute or funny, and the guy continues anyway.... Over and Over again..... He should get his ass beat. And That was my original point.

YOU brought up relationships... The guy had no prior relationship with the girl. You brought up two way street.... Unless you have consent, you are obviously relying on one way communication and luck. Two things that could get you in trouble. Look at me and ask yourself if you feel lucky... I'll answer... NO!

As for your bros before hos statement.... (and this after saying how upset it makes you when you see the behavior of desperate boys) That doesn't worry me, not one bit because the gatherings and the parties I attend.... The guys will DEAL WITH anyone who crosses the line. So I know that YOU won't violate me... or at least you won't get away with it. (neither will anyone else) Its always good to know about the company you are going to be hanging with before you play.

And well... I am pretty much through with this subject. It is obvious that some people don't think unwanted physical touch is a bad thing. And maybe some guys have run into willing little weak girls all their lives... the types who do not stand up for themselves when they really mean no. Well hey... as you all know... I am surely not one of those.

Live, Laugh and TICKLE
Sunriseticklee

 

[areenactor]

going off on a tangent

sunrise, you said a boy friend is only a sweet guy who takes you out for dinner, once in a while. or something very close.
to me that's wrong. what you are discribing is a "date" not a boy friend. a b.f. is some one to cultivate a relationship with, not the occational meal ticket. a b.f. is someone you should be romanticly inclined with. maybe this is just a samantic misunderstanding, i hope so. cause i never would have pegged you for a user.
steve

 

[JoBelle]

Just thought I'd chime in, though a bit late I know.

Nothing much to say other than the fact that I *SURPRISE* agree with Bella, Sunrise, EQ and the other ladies. I'd fancy a reply from one of my fellow chicks that actually supported confessor's behavior. It would make an interesting conversation I'm sure.

I think the problem I have with the whole scenario isn't that he he jumped at a chance to live out a tickle urge. Granted, I don't think the manner in which he did it was most favorable. I think the problem comes in two other forms.

A) He seemed to do it out of spite for the girl...not out of respect or attraction. A single playful stroke up the sole that brought a giggle MAY have been accepted by someone who didn't take tickling as seriously as we all do. It would have been viewed as light and flirtatious. Please note that would have likely required a bit of pre-tickle flirting and banter that let you know she was responsive. Ever notice how a girl or a guy will run a finger along someone's arm in a social situation as a form of flirting? THAT is the comparison I'm making here.

B) After he knew she did not like it, he continued. Grrrrrrrr

Alcohol - no excuse. A judge wouldn't buy it, so why should anyone else? (Gee, officer...I'm drunk..that's why I hit the other car. Can I go home now?)

Age - no excuse. Even kids in kingergarten know to "keep their body parts to themselves."

Everything Krokus said - YAWN

Everyone woman who replied here LOVES tickling. Odd how none like it THAT way.

Joby

 

[BellaRisa]

For Featherdfingers

Hi Fingers,

I really like what you've been saying, even the stuff I don't agree with is well written and respectfully done. (A few here could learn from you). I took a few of your statements and commented:

"I don't see anything wrong with running up to a girl you barely know and sharing one very quick, casual tickle with her, at least during the years of one's youth. Again, not really something I've done personally, but why not??" You never know when she might actually respond to being tickled! I dunno...perhaps this is best chalked up as a difference between genders? I mean, I would obviously be positively elated to have a strange girl sneak up behind me and tickle me..."

This has been amusing me, I've read it in many of the male's responses to this thread. 'Who me?? Oh I've never done it/wouldn't do it, but it's not a bad thing...' Hmmmm....

I'm wondering if there's an age difference in play here, more than gender. Younger folks, closer to 20 than 30, are often still doing that quick tickle/pinch/fondle thing that they were doing in junior high and high school. I don't know of a single girl who appreciated it. True, it was useful in showing us that the guy 'liked' us, but if he had come up to us with a daisy he'd picked or offered us the cupcake from his bag lunch we were happier-and saw him as less of a doofus (and yes, I asked around.) Ask any chick you know, she'll tell you that we leaped for joy when the guys stopped punching us and pulling our hair and started TALKING to us.

And um, there is definitely a discrepancy between the sexes as far as being receptive-I have never heard of a young guy being upset that a strange girl did ANYTHING to him, young males aren't as...selective and discriminating...with these things...



"relationships = OUR rules, OUR body, OUR decisions. There are always TWO (and in some open-minded regions, more ) individual people involved in the dating process, so can you please explain to me how when you get involved with someone you still obey by YOUR rules and YOUR decisions? Relationships thrive on a constant state of give-and-take. I agree that there could (and should) be RULES in said relationship, but these are always adapted RULES that evolve out of the individuals' RULES in the beginning. I would question your "MY rules, MY body, MY decision" philosophy to the core in the sense that it doesn't really appear like you're interested in a "true" relationship, rather being yourself while hanging out with someone else. Not that there is anything wrong with that, at all!"

This I didn't grasp at all, Fingers. I've been married since before Noah got his water wings, and my body is still MINE. I definitely share it very muchly and very freely, but my husband doesn't do anything I don't want him to. No Still means NO. We may (ahem) negotiate if there's something one of us wants to try, compromise is indeed the key. But ultimately (sing it with me folks) NO means NO. Because we respect each other. And as far as it looking like she doesn't want a true relationship: of course she's still herself while she's with someone else! You're a whole complete person before you get into a relationship, love enhances you greatly but doesn't MAKE you. You don't enter into a union to become someone else, you find the person who's compatible with who you really ARE. Yes, we grow and evolve together, but our marriage joined two wholes into a bigger, cuddlier whole. I love the old phrase 'my better half', but after 2 babies and all this adventure I know he's my PARTNER. In every sense of the word.


"for some women (I would say "most," but I sure as heck don't have the statistical data to back that up! ), the idea of having their bodies acting as open maps for their boyfriends is a very sexy concept, indeed!"

lol I've had that map drawn, In chocolate syrup (eg). But having that map explored was a mutual decision (so was replacing those poor sheets).


"But I'm not naive enough to believe all women want good guys, either. There's a definite appeal to the grittier, edgier personality that I can certainly understand."

Um, this one was personal, for me. A gritty, edgy personality is sexy as all hell, but doesn't equal mean nasty thug. As I've said, I indulge in a little BDSM and spanking along with tickling, and I have males in my life who DEFINITELY fit the 'Big Bad Wolf' persona. Were talking over six feet, 200+ lb, biker jacket wearing, large hunks of dominant masculinity that will actually spank you hard and put you in the corner like a 6 yr old. They demand obedience and respect when I'm with them. BUT, once again-they don't do ANYTHING or require anything I don't want and agree to beforehand. I have yet to meet a girl who really, truly, wants a cruddy neanderthal who doesn't listen to what she wants and needs, and treats her body like his property even when she doesn't want him to. I'd be worried about her if I did.



"The simple point I was trying to make last time was that it is not illegal for a guy attending the same party as a girl to sneak up behind a her and give her a quick tickle -- the day something like that becomes outlawed is the day I'll voluntarily die. By the same token, by choosing to perform such an action, that guy is also runs the risk of paying a price (whether it be physical, verbal, or otherwise) for such a decision."


I agree with you on this one, nicely put

Bella

 

[siamese dream]

I should just run away from this topic...but...

Just a few more thoughts from a woman's point of view on relationships and physical intimacy:

I agree that in a relationship, it's all about compromise and mutual affection. My body is my own; I wouldn't allow anything done to it that I wouldn't enjoy...but I would also be open to new ideas, if my partner said "I would really love it if I could do this to you"...as long as it wasn't something that I just could never get into, I would try it with him. There's a difference between a guy who wants to explore your body, and one who wants to own it. The idea of "exploration" of the body actually sounds pretty sexy to me. And it isn't all about my body either...it would be about his body too. I'm a giver and a receiver, in many many ways . When I love someone, giving him pleasure is almost as pleasurable to me as receiving it. So, for us to have a fantastic physical relationship, I think he would have to be open to let me explore his body, and I would be open to letting him explore mine. Of course, there are always limits, and I would always respect his limits, and he damn well better always respect mine, or else there will be a problem.

I might be opening a whole new can of worms here... but I think the bad feelings about being touched on by a strange man are coming from a sense of fear. This is something, I think, that a man could never fully understand about a woman. I think most women have an underlying fear of men... and for good reason. A single girl living alone has a lot more fear about her situation, in my opinion, than a single guy living alone. I'm not saying that nothing bad can happen to men... people of both genders are abused and hurt, even killed, every day. But women are targeted a lot, women are victims a lot, and knowing that makes us afraid when a strange guy keeps touching and flirting, and being pushy, even after we've said no. A lot of women react to that by getting pissed off, and anger is a normal response to it, but I think underneath the anger is fear.

Men who don't take no for an answer frighten me, and I think most women feel the same way. These comments aren't meant towards the situation confessor originally posted about; it's just a basic observation.

 

[confessor]

A little update on the night in question:

I spoke to my buddy about what happened. He said the girl never complained about my behavior to him privately. Therefore, he did not think she was terribly upset by the tickling. However, he did say that she doesn't like foot tickling. I guess its more of an aggravation to her than real torture.

He did not think I had burned any bridges with this girl. He just told me to lay off her feet, and if I tickle her again, I should tickle her somewhere else.

He did not think what I did was out of line for a party environment. The only reason he stopped me is because he likes this girl and knows how much I like tickling. I guess he saw it as flirting.

Finally, I told him that I got some stern responses from this forum. He said I was taking this much too seriously. He did not see what I did as being anywhere close to grabbing a girl's ass or breasts without her permission. He thought feet were different, and that contact with such body parts is to be expected at a "party".

I feel much better after talking to him. I am glad I did not totally alienate this girl, cause she hangs with our crew often. But, I will never tickle her feet again. If she really doesn't like it, then what's the point? She doesn't go out of her way to aggravate me, so why should I aggravate her.

What really surprised me about this conversation is that he did not see what I did as being a big deal. I suppose it is because he is a man, giving a male perspective on the events that took place.

 

[ShiningIce]

I had no idea tickling a girl's feet at a party was so horribly wrong...Geez lighten up people

 

[Phineas]

Confessor...

This is prolly a dumb question, but can I ask why you're so concerned about "burning bridges" with this girl when A) you've already decided she's a bitch and B) your friend likes her anyway?

 

[TickleCrazy]

Re: I should just run away from this topic...but...

... I might be opening a whole new can of worms here... but I think the bad feelings about being touched on by a strange man are coming from a sense of fear. ...anger is a normal response to it, but I think underneath the anger is fear.

I haven't said anything here because I dislike the tone this whole thread has taken. I'm not judge or jury or even lawyer. But I would like to say that Siamese's observation is right on the money. Very perceptive, girl.

 

[TickleCrazy]

Re: Enough.

The topic of this thread is whether confessor was out of line at a party or if his friends overreacted. All OT posts will be removed. Any arguments between members can be handled off-forum. If the thread can't stay on topic, it will be closed.

EQ

Oops, saw that after posting my comment. Sorry.

 

[evilqueen]

No problem, Ticklecrazy - please feel free to discuss this...it's germane to the original topic.

 

[Featherdfingers]

Leave it to SD to cut to the two core issues beneath this debate: trust and fear

siamese dream wrote:
There's a difference between a guy who wants to explore your body, and one who wants to own it.

Yes, there certainly is a difference, and one of the crazy-sexy-cool (but also immensely DANGEROUS) things about tickling and bondage is how the line between exploration of one's body and possession of one's body is straddled as finely as <insert dirty sexual metaphor here>. To be honest, the difference between exploration and possession often comes down to how comfortable a person feels around someone else. For example, a woman that adores having her hiney spanked by a close friend might have nightmares about a stranger performing the exact same action. Of course, we're essentially talking about the issue of trust here, and this is a quality that is rarely the same for any two people (it's all tangled up in a morass of morality, experience, and personal perspectives on the human nature and society at large). For issues of personal safety, I think it becomes necessary that single women (in general) be "less trustworthy" about any forms of deviancy (sexual or otherwise) than single men. More on that below...

I might be opening a whole new can of worms here... but I think the bad feelings about being touched on by a strange man are coming from a sense of fear. This is something, I think, that a man could never fully understand about a woman. I think most women have an underlying fear of men... and for good reason.

You're absolutely right. This is kind of what I was alluding to when I said the reason for the differences of opinions on this subject had something to do with our gender lifestyles. But you have worded it infinitely more lucidly than I!

I've always propose that if a guy ever truly wants to get a dose of what it's like being a woman (without the childbirth, of course) in a dating environment -- go to a gay bar. (Admittedly, this is an experiment that very few straight men would be excited to try!). But seriously, from a sociological perspective, it is a very interesting experience. Most men are used to being dominant, or the "predators" in a dating environment. Having this role questioned can lead to an extremely uncomfortable and stressful environment!

A lot of women react to that by getting pissed off, and anger is a normal response to it, but I think underneath the anger is fear.

Normal and appropriate, I'd say, as anger is usually an emotion expended to gain control over a situation that you feel you should be in control of, but you are not. What is that saying Yoda had in Episode 1? "Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering."

Bet George Lucas never thought his dialogue would be used to engage in a philosophical debate on a tickling forum.

 

[Featherdfingers]

I'm wondering if there's an age difference in play here, more than gender. Younger folks, closer to 20 than 30, are often still doing that quick tickle/pinch/fondle thing that they were doing in junior high and high school. I don't know of a single girl who appreciated it. True, it was useful in showing us that the guy 'liked' us, but if he had come up to us with a daisy he'd picked or offered us the cupcake from his bag lunch we were happier-and saw him as less of a doofus (and yes, I asked around.) Ask any chick you know, she'll tell you that we leaped for joy when the guys stopped punching us and pulling our hair and started TALKING to us.

You certainly make a good point about the age issue. There is a certain "anything goes" attitude towards physical contact for many young folks throughout high school and (for some) even college. Something also keeps pushing me back towards the gender difference, though. One of the sharpest things I have recently read about the difference between the mentality of males and females is (sorry I forget the name of the author to whom this quote should be attributed)is the following:

While men often view physical connections as entirely separate from emotional connections, women often view physical connections as natural outgrowths of their emotional connections.

Now I've never been one for unfair stereotypes, but this seems to synch up pretty well with my own individual views, and how they differ from those of my close female friends. While I think I would be willing to play with pretty much any female who's game (I certainly don't, but I think that has more to do with my lack of initiative and the remnants of a relatively strict upbringing), I really hesitate to share my deepest thoughts and innermost desires unless I sense a real connection. I get the sense that this is philosophy is almost reversed for a lot of women (i.e. they're more capable of casual emotional connections, but less comfortable with casual physical connections). All of this goes a long way toward backing up your observation that:

there is definitely a discrepancy between the sexes as far as being receptive-I have never heard of a young guy being upset that a strange girl did ANYTHING to him, young males aren't as...selective and discriminating...with these things...

Curious as to what you ("you" as in bella) or any other women out there think of my observations here. After all, one can speculate on the way women feel or think all day long, but unless you are one, it's all pure extrapolation.