...??? about a younger female..

[shyguy10]

so today i was at my friends graduation get together. yes i am now a graduate of VT...but anyways at my friends get together she had a younger cousin...she was 14. i am 23 (male). now she was sitting on the floor bare footed and this young female had a to die for pedicure and WRINKLY!! soles..now she sat in front of me with her feet extended in a chair and i was going nuts looking at her soft pink wrinkly soles..even one time while everyone was chatting..and yes i did talk to her...i swore she caught me staring at her feet. but anyways i got so ffreaking turned on looking at her feet and would have given anything to touch them...is that wrong!!!! i have never been attracted to a young females feet....i mean no younger than 18 in regards to me wanting to play with...let me kkkknooow yalls opinion..

 

[MistressValerie1]

It's common for younger adults to have occasional fantasies about older adolescents, but it would be morally wrong for a 23 year-old man to touch a 14 year-old girl in any way for personal gratification.

 

[shyguy10]

...

thanks...yeah i reckon the reason why i was so turned on was because she had a pedicure and females with pedicures usually like there feet plalyed with..at least in my experiences

 

[nessonite1]

I don't see a problem either really. I can think of no possible biological or evolutionary advantage to be sexually uninteresting until the magical age of 18. The significance of different ages are purely imaginary and man-made. What you experienced was perfectly natural but, of course as Missy Val said, should not be acted upon.

 

[laughingboy2000]

I don't see a problem either really. I can think of no possible biological or evolutionary advantage to be sexually uninteresting until the magical age of 18. The significance of different ages are purely imaginary and man-made. What you experienced was perfectly natural but, of course as Missy Val said, should not be acted upon.

Agreed completely.

 

[shyguy10]

si..

..nice..!!! well the funny thing is that same night..later as my friend and a few members of her family were riding in there surburban i got the chance to tickle/play with my friends aunt right foot. she was like in her 40's..and very hot aunt may i add. she had her nails all did up and the pedicure was really nice. well i let my left hand touch her foot while we were sitting in the back seat..after leaving it there for like 20 seconds with out her saying anything i grabbed her arch and started runnning my fingers in her arch..on her heel..under her toes..playing with her toes..and massaging her foot. the entire time we kept the conversation going with the other family members who were in the car. when i would hold her toes up and run my fingers in her arch she would moan and laugh...but the funny thing was since i kept talking her sister.. (my friends mom who was sitting in front of us) did not notice...at one point i had her wiggling her toes while i played with her foot. i knew i would be home free because earlier that nite i tickled her foot for a few seconds..then like 5 minutes later i ran my fingers under her arch and she didnt laugh..or say anything..so i moved my fingers all over her sole and she still didnt say anything...anyways nessonite i would love to buy a pair of your worn stockings...

sincerely..haha..your 2005 college graduate 😀

 

[aenglish]

I don't see a problem either really. I can think of no possible biological or evolutionary advantage to be sexually uninteresting until the magical age of 18. The significance of different ages are purely imaginary and man-made. What you experienced was perfectly natural but, of course as Missy Val said, should not be acted upon.

What the lady said...

I hope the in-truck experience made up for the unrequitedness of the earlier encounter!

 

[shyguy10]

trust me..it did...i know for a fact just because what my friend has told me about her aunt..that i could have probably sucked her toes and all..held her down and tickled the hell out of her feet. but anyways thats my 2 cents.

 

[maniactickler38]

I see no problem with a few harmless tickles. id have gone for it in the right situation.

 

[Dude'sonfire]

Nessonite... You're a walking cultural analyst lol. Age limits are totally socially imposed. Hell, i'd even say if she didnt mind just tickle her for crying out loud, she's not gonna have nine babies and die a heroin addict. Right and wrong are illusions spread and imposed by people who want control; make up your own mind about what you think is moral or not, based on your own thought and experience.
Of course *if* what you think is ok differs *drastically* from the social norm, you may have to face serious jail time lol, so just be aware that doing your own thing will have adverse consequence, depending on degree. 😛
So to answer you're question I don't think it was at all "wrong". I hate that word. In a moral context at least. It just seems really... closed minded to me... haha you could even say i feel its "wrong" to call things "wrong". lol. Man, words suck...

 

[TickledToDeath]

Having an attraction to barefeet is in and of itself a seperate issue of being attracted to a younger or underage girl. The foot attraction for the most part, there is nothing wrong but going beyond that and being attracted and taking action on an underage girl would be wrong. Anything beyond a playful coochie coo all in FUN is fine however anything beyond THAT again would be wrong.

TTD

 

[aenglish]

Right and wrong are illusions spread and imposed by people who want control; make up your own mind about what you think is moral or not, based on your own thought and experience.

Quiet, you fool! James Dobson or Pat Robertson might hear you, and send you off for re-education! (Only half-joking).

The negative legal consequences of certain endeavors notwithstanding, I have found that the Golden Rule generally works best for most situations.

 

[outspacer11]

Look, to my mind, you're better off sticking to the rule that any sort of sexual contact with people under 18, sexual defined in terms of whether you get turned on by it, is probably better to avoid. If nothing else, you'll feel a little creepy about it. And what's this about playing with her aunt's foot or something? Look, to my way of thinking this is disturbing. I think the test is this: if you get turned on by playing with her feet, then don't do it unless you would also be fine playing with her breasts.
I'm interested in the point before, in part because I think it is mistaken. The idea is this: right and wrong is pretty much subjective, so if someone says what you do is wrong that's just their perspective. The trouble is that from a pragmatic point of view disagreeing with people on fundamentals does you no good. To put this another way: you may not see anything wrong in a particular behaviour, but if the other 6 billion people in the world do then you either need to rethink your position or come up with a way to convince them of the legitimacy of your way of thinking. And I don't think the old relativist line will cut it. To get even more techincal, surely "wrong" is a concept that relates implicitly to other peoples' ideas - you can say you approve or disapprove of something, or that other people, given their background assumptions, should agree or disagree with it. But in the end, someone who is excluded from society is a pariah whether they're right or wrong from a logical or pragmatic point of view.
Point is, I'd be very careful doing this sort of thing with friends' family members. However you justify it, the fact is that it will generally be seen as kind of sick.
Just my 2c.

Cheers.

 

[outspacer11]

Sorry, I'm a little drunk - I'll come back and try to clarify this later

 

[MistressValerie1]

Look, to my mind, you're better off sticking to the rule that any sort of sexual contact with people under 18, sexual defined in terms of whether you get turned on by it, is probably better to avoid. If nothing else, you'll feel a little creepy about it. And what's this about playing with her aunt's foot or something? Look, to my way of thinking this is disturbing. I think the test is this: if you get turned on by playing with her feet, then don't do it unless you would also be fine playing with her breasts. ...

Very well said, and very good advice!

 

[shyguy10]

well i am suprised this many people would respond. but i agree if i had an attraction to that 14 year old beyond wanting tto tickle her feet that would be SICK!!...trust me i do not dable with younger girls or even...eeeww..yeah thats straight sick. but um yeah even in the future if i were to encounter a similar situation i would make sure that the females feet that i was tickling was cool with it or at least knew me..

 

[nessonite1]

There is little to no difference physically between the foot of a 14 year old and the foot of an 18 year old. I know my shoe size hasn't changed since then. So it's understandable that your subconcious would latch on to what your eye sees and respond to it regardless of what your moral concious mind thinks about it. Cause really it's seeing the exact same thing whether the girl is 14 or 18 or 25.

 

[-Kunoke-]

As it's been stated bluntly already, if you have a foot fetish, then seeing a naked foot, to you, would be like seeing a naked breast. When you touch the foot of a younger girl while having a foot fetish, it may mean nothing to them, but to you, it's no different than if you were touching their breast. Having thoughts like that is fine, but leave it at thoughts, and dont actually consider it. I know I've been attracted to younger female's feet, but that doesn't mean I'd go up and tickle them, because I know what that would mean in my mind. Just basically repeating, but I like to put it in my own words.

 

[outspacer11]

Very well said, and very good advice!

Wow, thanks - I'm surprised that that comment applies to anything in that mess! Personally I have issues with the idea that all morality is subjective (which is what I was trying to get at in that last bit), but I'll leave the undergrad philosophy to one side for the moment. In any case, you must admit that this is the excuse most commonly used by serial killers, paedophiles etc. People don't give it much credence coming from them, and I don't think they'll give it much credence in your situation either. Again, this is a side-track.
Point is:
If it turns you on then don't do it with anyone inappropriate - as I said earlier, if you wouldn't feel comfortable playing with their breasts then don't do anything else that gets you going. The alternative is deceptive and creepy, and this is how it will eventually leave you feeling (and if it doesn't then it probably should).
As far as youth is concerned, I'd be personally freaked out if I was getting turned on by tickling the feet of a 14-year-old. I'd be freaked out if I was turned on by a 14 year old period. And I sure as hell wouldn't do anything about it. Look, if you can avoid thinking about this kind of thing you're probably better off doing so.
I have to admit that I'm also drunk now - maybe this isn't more helpful than my last post. I swear I'll come back and post something sober soon. Good luck with it all, anyway.

 

[nessonite1]

http://www.alcoholics-anonymous.org/

😛

 

[Dude'sonfire]

outspacer1, i think we're kinda saying the same thing in a different way lol. I mean i did say that you should judge what's right and wrong from your own experience and judgement, and that's somewhat similar to what your saying here: "if you get turned on by playing with her feet, then don't do it unless you would also be fine playing with her breasts..." Also, i did say that if you deviate significantly from what is socially acceptable, you'll have to face the consequences, which again is similar to: "But in the end, someone who is excluded from society is a pariah whether they're right or wrong from a logical or pragmatic point of view".
I totally agree with you that the absolutely relatavist theory is completely impractical, which is why i tried to cover the above sides of the issue. I just get bugged when people assume something makes them a worse person because its adverstised to be wrong by the 'establishment' lol. Hey, i play guitar, sue me 😛.
Just for the record, I personally couldn't engage in sexual activity with a girl who I thought hadn't reached physical maturity, because it would indeed make me feel incredibly sick lol, though i can't say i really give a shit about the number 18. What i mean is that I'm only 19, and i would gladly date a 16 year old girl without a single notch on my conscience. Anyway, love and peace :happy:

 

[whistler1]

so let me get this straight... a person without a foot/tickle fetish is allowed to tickle the feet of a 14 year old since it's just playing/having fun. But the same does not apply to someone who DOES have a tickling fetish?

Some of you people are a far too politically correct, so what if he tickles her? He's not breaking the law, it's just tickling to see her reaction!

Your "playing with her breasts" arguement does not hold water. Firstly, she's 14 and that would be illegal, secondly it would be inappropriate to play with the breasts of ANYONE (18 or over) without consent, a quick 5 minute tickle on her feet however is innocent in the eyes of the law.

 

[MistressValerie1]

Andrew Marks, 42, was arrested a few days ago in Long Island for "endagering the welfare of a child." His crime: he approached 14- and 15- year-old girls and asked questions about their feet, and requested that they model footwear for him. He also rubbed one girl's foot for "10 seconds." He is now out on bail.

Full story here.

In sum, it might not be such a good idea for adults to touch underaged girls' feet.

 

[nessonite1]

Whether it's "technically" legal or not the Thought Police will still get you. While the man in Missy Val's example quite obviously had sexual overtones to his actions you'd have to be 100% certain that there is no way whatsoever that anyone would see your actions as anything less than pure.
And with people being as paranoid as they are these days it would be impossible for ANY man, fetishist or not, 100% pure or not, to be seen as having innocent intentions when having any contact with a teenaged girl. It may be unfair but it's not worth taking the chance unless you had a long, established, close relationship with her (which would be really hard unless it is family).

 

[Ignatz]

Whether it's "technically" legal or not the Thought Police will still get you. While the man in Missy Val's example quite obviously had sexual overtones to his actions you'd have to be 100% certain that there is no way whatsoever that anyone would see your actions as anything less than pure.
And with people being as paranoid as they are these days it would be impossible for ANY man, fetishist or not, 100% pure or not, to be seen as having innocent intentions when having any contact with a teenaged girl. It may be unfair but it's not worth taking the chance unless you had a long, established, close relationship with her (which would be really hard unless it is family).

You took the words right out of my mouth, Nessie...or...right out from under my typing fingers...or something. Anyway...fairly or unfairly, the merest suspicion of pedophilia will cling to a man like skunk funk in this day and age. Whether it's legal or moral or not, it's just not worth it.