- Joined
- Apr 2, 2001
- Messages
- 28,779
- Points
- 113
A couple of recent threads got me off on this train of thought.
Over the years I've noticed that even though physical ticklishness is fairly constant, the responsiveness to it is completely dependant on the context of the situation. If a person is being tickled by someone they like and trust, not only are they more likely to laugh and smile, but they're also more likely to be unable to stop themselves. On some level, the emotional context gives them permission to surrender to it, even if they don't want to on a more conscious level.
I started noticing the trend when I started noticing that what I said had a direct influence on how hard a model was laughing. If I was completely silent while tickling her, the response was predictable, but I could throw her completely off her game by saying something that made her feel cute, or embarassed, and suddenly, she would start laughing twice as hard. Or if she was managing to be stoic, a single word at the right time could completely destroy her composure.
On the opposite side of that, when someone is pissed off, or scared, or doesn't feel safe, their response to being tickled will tend to change. They're more likely to scream and whimper than laugh and giggle, and instead of a smile, they grimace.
So my question is, who here feels that their ticklishness is not contextual and would be helpless to do anything but laugh and act cute, even if they were being tickled in a negative context, like a complete stranger just grabs you and physically overpowers you and starts tickling you and doesn't stop?
I suspect, without being able to prove it obviously, that most people would not laugh... they would scream, and maybe cry. But that's probably not true of everyone.
Discuss...
Over the years I've noticed that even though physical ticklishness is fairly constant, the responsiveness to it is completely dependant on the context of the situation. If a person is being tickled by someone they like and trust, not only are they more likely to laugh and smile, but they're also more likely to be unable to stop themselves. On some level, the emotional context gives them permission to surrender to it, even if they don't want to on a more conscious level.
I started noticing the trend when I started noticing that what I said had a direct influence on how hard a model was laughing. If I was completely silent while tickling her, the response was predictable, but I could throw her completely off her game by saying something that made her feel cute, or embarassed, and suddenly, she would start laughing twice as hard. Or if she was managing to be stoic, a single word at the right time could completely destroy her composure.
On the opposite side of that, when someone is pissed off, or scared, or doesn't feel safe, their response to being tickled will tend to change. They're more likely to scream and whimper than laugh and giggle, and instead of a smile, they grimace.
So my question is, who here feels that their ticklishness is not contextual and would be helpless to do anything but laugh and act cute, even if they were being tickled in a negative context, like a complete stranger just grabs you and physically overpowers you and starts tickling you and doesn't stop?
I suspect, without being able to prove it obviously, that most people would not laugh... they would scream, and maybe cry. But that's probably not true of everyone.
Discuss...
- but the anxiety and emotional distractions I was experiencing just by being at my 1st gathering and actually being tickled definitely dulled the sense, unfortunately 
