The non-consensual crap

[laziva]

Ok, I don't understand the non-consensual crap I have been reading a lot on this forum. I thought that the basis of the tickle torture fetish was to be out of control of the situation. Trusting your partner is one thing, but I love to give absolute power to Skely to do with me whatever he wants, because for me is exciting not to know what he is going to do next, or how far he is going to go. That is what makes tickle torture so adictive for me. I mean If a model do not trust the producer, just walk away before he tie you up, or don't sign the release at the end. Many models abuse the use of the safeword and they don't understand that a safeword is only for emergencies, but when a session is about tickle torture, hello, you are going to be tortured, and what makes this out of this world is the feeling of being totally out of control.

When you use the term "non-consensual" it sounds like the model got raped, or was forced to do something against her will, but this is not the case, because a model was not dragged, kidnapped, druged, held against her will. She gave consent the first step she took into that room and she knew what was going to happened. She knew what she was coming for.

 

[rhiannon]

Nobody actually believes that there is non-con tickling in a tickling vid! But still there should be a safeword, especially if the model has not been tickled like that before or not from that producer. There has to be a way of stopping the tickling when the model wants it to stop.

Maybe it is different for you, but most models aren't into being tickle tortured (if I did a clip, I would most likely not need the safeword for the duration of the clip, because I am into it...), so it is up to them when they get a break or when it stops.

If you are referring to the one clip that was advertised as being non-con - that was most likely fake.

 

[Adam]

Well, I suppose the term "emergency" depends on your point of view. I think it's cool that you enjoy stretching your limits, so more power to you. I believe the use of a safe word is entirely dependent on who you are and what your tolerance level is. I have seen video clips on this very site before where there have been models that have signed up for a prolonged tickling, not realizing how much they would truly hate it while it was going on. These examples seem to be fairly few and far between, but I can understand where a few may need to use a safe word while others can be tickled for much longer.

As far as being non-consensual, I do agree that if a producer explains, in detail, exactly what is going to happen once the cameras are turned on and the model signs on for it, then it's not a truly non-consensual act. But to play devil's advocate, let's say a producer decides to use a vibrator in the scene, but did not inform the model of that beforehand. Or perhaps the model tells the producer beforehand, "I will not tolerate the use of a vibrator" and the producer uses one anyway. Then I'm undoubtedly calling it non-consensual.

Good post for discussion. There are a number of ways to look at this.

 

[rhiannon]

But to play devil's advocate, let's say a producer decides to use a vibrator in the scene, but did not inform the model of that beforehand. Or perhaps the model tells the producer beforehand, "I will not tolerate the use of a vibrator" and the producer uses one anyway. Then I'm calling it non-consensual.

Which would be truly stupid of the producer since there is a signed contract that proves what she agreed to and what she didn't agree to!

 

[Adam]

Which would be truly stupid of the producer since there is a signed contract that proves what she agreed to and what she didn't agree to!

Oh, hell yes! Grounds to get oneself in a lot of trouble.

 

[LD_Tickler]

You're right, non-consensual tickling is when a person is tickled against their will, and many people enjoy that idea.

Like Rhiannon said, that's not what happen in videos, and the people who are into non-con generally like it as a fantasy. They know it would be wrong in reality.

 

[laziva]

Actually, non-consensual tickling happens in real life all the time! I mean, how many times I have been gangtickled by friends without asking.... and I don't see anybody calling the cops right? So why such a big deal when we see a video that looks like non-consensual tickling?

I agree on the vib comment. But thats the homework model and producer have to do before the shoot, before even talking about rates. Talk about details, go to the producer's website and watch some clips to know what he is up to and set the boundaries before you get tied up.

You're right, non-consensual tickling is when a person is tickled against their will, and many people enjoy that idea.

Like Rhiannon said, that's not what happen in videos, and the people who are into non-con generally like it as a fantasy. They know it would be wrong in reality.

 

[rhiannon]

Actually, non-consensual tickling happens in real life all the time! I mean, how many times I have been gangtickled by friends without asking.... and I don't see anybody calling the cops right? So why such a big deal when we see a video that looks like non-consensual tickling?

It is kinda different if you get playfully tickled by friends or if you get tied down, tickled, filmed against your will to sell the clip to people on the net jacking off to it, right?

That goes if it actually IS non-con, not just if it LOOKS like it!

Oh, and by the way, just because it happens in real life all the time doesn't make it okay. A lot of people get traumatized from stuff like that.

 

[LD_Tickler]

Actually, non-consensual tickling happens in real life all the time! I mean, how many times I have been gangtickled by friends without asking.... and I don't see anybody calling the cops right? So why such a big deal when we see a video that looks like non-consensual tickling?

Obviously there's a gradient. Spontaneous tickling between friends is one thing. It's a different thing altogether to stalk somebody, knock them out, kidnap them, tie them up in your home, etc etc...

The 'big deal' when we see something that looks like it might really be non-consensual in a video, is that we're worried that a model may have been lured to a shoot under false pretenses, or tricked. For some people, tickling is really horrible. To trick somebody into bondage then tickle them is a violation of privacy, safety, and potential abuse.

 

[laziva]

The 'big deal' when we see something that looks like it might really be non-consensual in a video, is that we're worried that a model may have been lured to a shoot under false pretenses, or tricked. For some people, tickling is really horrible. To trick somebody into bondage then tickle them is a violation of privacy, safety, and potential abuse.

Good point! And I agree to some point, but is really difficult to actually tie someone up without her knowing you are tying her up, unless she is drug or drunk.

Reality check here: In an adult entertainment environment, the chances of this scenario "a model may have been lured to a shoot under false pretenses, or tricked" are almost none. If this ever happen, the producer would be getting into big trouble.

But when you see a video on this forum that has a model tied up, naked, spread, and she is tickled tortured and other things, she gave consent! She knew! She may not have realized it was goint to be so hard, or agonizing, but if you buy a ticket for a movie and your can't ask for a refund if the movie sucks! Thats what I am trying to say, to raise the "Non-Consensual Flag!" just because a model says the safeword and the tickler keeps going I think is not understanding the true nature of this fetish!

 

[rhiannon]

Good point! And I agree to some point, but is really difficult to actually tie someone up without her knowing you are tying her up, unless she is drug or drunk.

You can tie someone up under false pretenses though. Tell them you are going to do vibrator play or other stuff. I've been tied down before for fun and games without tickling.

So just because someone lets you tie them up consensually does not mean the person lets you tickle him/her consensually.

 

[laziva]

But isn't that considered "Spontaneous tickling"?

Also if the model signs the release of the material, she is giving consent.

 

[rhiannon]

No, that is considered breach of contract and assault! If I sign a contract for a forced orgasm clip and the producer decides to tickle me instead, he forced it on me and it is illegal. I would FOR SURE not sign a release form after the fact! And the producer would be stupid to do something - and FILM it! - that the model did not sign for beforehand, because then there is evidence he did something illegal right there!

There is nothing happening spontaneously in a professional clip! Just turn it around...you sign for a tickling clip and then the producer decides to have sex with you...would you consider that "spontaneous lovemaking"??

 

[laziva]

There is nothing happening spontaneously in a professional clip! Just turn it around...you sign for a tickling clip and then the producer decides to have sex with you...would you consider that "spontaneous lovemaking"??

Thats why I say that everything should be talked before even setting a foot on the producers studio. And that when you see a video posted by a bonafide producers, regardless of how much agony the model is in, you are seeing a consensual work, because if a producers do and posts a video without the models consent he can go to jail!

 

[rhiannon]

Right now you are the only one claiming somebody said there is non-consensual stuff happening in clips!

Again: NOBODY ON HERE believes that non-con stuff that has NOT been talked about before the shoot can be seen on clips!

 

[skelyrata]

Thank you for bringing this subject Laziva! I'm glad a model brought it up!

This is how a video gets to be done following the normal path:

1. Producers post add on Sexyjobs, ModelMayhem, OMP, Craigslist, looking for model with basic details.

2. Model contact producer showing her interest in working for his company. This implies that she visited his site, and is ok with the basic details he wrote on the add, but

3. The producer replies to the model with more details of the elements of the session, and recommends her to visit his site to become familiar with his work.

4. She replies saying that she saw the site and is ok with everything she see in there.

5. He replies back and they set rate and date.

6. Normally, on a first session, the model brings an escort.

7. Once she is on the studio, producer ask for ID and in my case I give her to read and sign the release stating that she agrees with the details and with what is about to happen.

8. The session takes place.

9. After we are done, I ask her if she is ok, if she has any comments, worries, objections, regrets.

10. She signs the release stating that we are done and she is ok and gives consent to release the content.

11. Producer pays her and she leaves.



Ok, now, how in the world, can anybody claim that something non-consensual can happen, if every step taken requires the model to agree.

 

[rhiannon]

Ok, now, how in the world, can anybody claim that something non-consensual can happen, if every step taken requires the model to agree.

I don't even know how this thread came up! WHO claimed that something non-consensual can happen?

 

[skelyrata]

She is not

Right now you are the only one claiming somebody said there is non-consensual stuff happening in clips!

Again: NOBODY ON HERE believes that non-con stuff that has NOT been talked about before the shoot can be seen on clips!

Actually I have been acused in this forum of doing non-consensual a couple of times, and what Laziva is trying to illustrate is that "Non-Consensual" is a very big term and very dangerous, and in a tickle torture environment, when a model signs-up to do a tickle torture video, she he is aware of whats coming at her even if the final work looks non-consensual, she agreed in every step.

 

[rhiannon]

I have never seen you getting accused of any of that. Where and when did that happen?

Everybody who thinks straight should know that it is not possible to do non-con stuff, film and sell it!

 

[laziva]

I don't even know how this thread came up! WHO claimed that something non-consensual can happen?

I have read many threads, specially in the video forum, where the "non-consensual flag" was raised! That is why I brought the subject. I am new at this forum and want to understand the minds of the fans!

 

[PiperGK1]

I agree that this is a good topic, the comments and responses are well thought out and quite informative.

Now, forgive me for a moment as I regress to my teens, and use an old colloquialism:

"Dude, you guys are totally killing my buzz."

This whole conversation is like trying to suspend my disbelief and enjoy a good horror movie while my girlfriend keeps telling me "that would never happen in real life."

I know. Really, I do. Just let me pretend for a little while....

 

[rhiannon]

I have read many threads, specially in the video forum, where the "non-consensual flag" was raised! That is why I brought the subject. I am new at this forum and want to understand the minds of the fans!

The flag usually gets raised about ONE clip where the producer claimed it really WAS non-con and advertised the clip as truly non-con and that the girl was a hooker who did not know what was going to happen.

Since she showed up in an audition clip on the producer's site with a different hair color though, that was clearly fake and just supposed to sell the clip better.

 

[The Last Laugh]

Again: NOBODY ON HERE believes that non-con stuff that has NOT been talked about before the shoot can be seen on clips!

Actually, based on some comments posted by people in previous threads about non-con tickling, there are clearly people who believe that such videos do exist.

 

[tcklft]

Actually, based on some comments posted by people in previous threads about non-con tickling, there are clearly people who believe that such videos do exist.

Yes, and I'm one of them.

Several years ago Tickling Paradise claimed to have made a pair of non-consensual videos. There was another site, tickleslaves.com (whose material is now being sold by Tickling Paradise) that claimed all their videos were non-con. IIRC both producers claimed the models were not told beforehand they would be tickled; the models signed the release forms that cleared this activity only after the filming. I suppose one can argue that as consent was given after the fact then the videos are ultimately consensual, but I'd argue that because the tickling wasn't consented to beforehand, what was produced is in fact a non-con video.

 

[tcklft]

When you use the term "non-consensual" it sounds like the model got raped, or was forced to do something against her will, but this is not the case, because a model was not dragged, kidnapped, druged, held against her will. She gave consent the first step she took into that room and she knew what was going to happened. She knew what she was coming for.

Well, consider this scenario:

1. A producer tells a model he wants to tie her up and film her struggling against some rope bondage. No other physical activity will occur.

2. The model agrees to this activity.

3. Once the model is restrained the producer has the model tickled, an activity she did not agree to beforehand.

4. Once the filming is over, the producer gives the model a wad of cash to get her to sign a consent form that allows the tickling.

The producer is of course running the risk that the model will call the cops, or get her SO over to raise some hell, but he's willing to take that chance and, ultimately, his plan works. Plausible?

I'm not condoning such desception, mind you; I find it abhorrent. But I believe it has occurred from time to time.