Choking

[Redmage]

But when we're talking about somebody intentionally dying, or intentionally being killed during "play", its rather easy for me to render opinion and "judgement" against such activity.....and I find it difficult to understand the inability of others to do the same.....

I don't think that society has any business telling someone how to live their life - including when and how to end it, if they choose to do so.

 

[BellaRisa]

Thats a fine hatchet job of judging me, Bella. I`m entitled to my opinion, and this has nothing to do with chivalry. So many young girls nowadays have such a low self esteem that they will do almost anything to please a guy. And don`t tell me I`m wrong, because I coached a girls club sports team for many years, so I speak with authority. If choking is what they really want, then by all means choke away. But what if its what HE wants??? Steph said it earlier that all kinds of bad things can happen including death over this type of behaviour. Try spending a little less time polishing your moderators badge, and understand there are two sides to this subject.

We get badges?

Anyway, chillax dude 😎 . I'm the proud mama of two gorgeous little girls; as a fellow parent with a very protective husband I absolutely understand where you're coming from. Seriously, I do. It's only the notion of wanting to physically harm a grown daughter's mate for giving her what she wants that ruffles my feathers. I don't believe that your sex life is your parents' business once you're over 18 unless you seem to be unhealthy and suffering; if you're just fine it's none of their business. And by saying this:

If choking is what they really want, then by all means choke away

you told me that we're on the same page, so please go forth feeling unjudged. Or something 😎 .

Bella

 

[meangry]

Consenting adults.

I don't give a damn what someone else says.

Consenting adults.

You take it all the way or you take it no way. You don't get to pick and choose what is comfortable to you because you make exceptions only for you.

If dude wants to choke his girlfriend, and she wants him to? You have no say in the matter. And if she dies, it's on him. It isn't about class. Anyone who spins that one needs to look where they are posting and realize that they aren't exactly clean in the perversion department.

If tickling someone against their will is better than willing adults choking each other, then I live in a screwed up world.

 

[jaba]

I don't think that society has any business telling someone how to live their life - including when and how to end it, if they choose to do so.

That's readily apparent, Redmage....

But since it may be "judgemental" of me to "assume and presume", ill just ask you and let you speak for yourself....

If two lovers (of any sexual persuasion) were in front of you, holding hands and standing on the edge of the bay bridge about to jump off to their deaths, does your "live and let die as long as it involves two adults engaged in consensual activity" prevent you from intervening in their suicide, because its " their business when and how to end their life, if they choose to do so", as you say?

 

[lk70]

If two lovers (of any sexual persuasion) were in front of you, holding hands and standing on the edge of the bay bridge about to jump off to their deaths, does your "live and let die as long as it involves two adults engaged in consensual activity" prevent you from intervening in their suicide, because its " their business when and how to end their life, if they choose to do so", as you say?

The question wasn't directed to me, but I'll answer it anyway. Depends on what you mean by "intervene." Would I try to talk to them to see if I could help? Sure. Would I call the cops to have them arrested before they could jump? No. I've found it to be enough of a challenge to understand myself and those close to me that I don't find it necessary or desirable to try to understand others. I don't think I have any business putting my values on others. If two people want to kill themselves, it really doesn't affect me. I guess that seems cold. Some people think I'm cold but I don't think so.

Everyone here is entitled to feel anyway they want to and it's ok. I don't think it's ok to interfere or judge someone's life unless they ask your opinion.

Judge is a tricky term though because we do all "judge" all the time. I just think we should only judge things we see and hear on our own terms, in terms of how we'd feel if we were in the same situation, and not judge someone else on their terms. Does it make any sense at all or should I just have stayed quiet?

 

[Redmage]

No, in my opinion they weren't. That was a tough area for my to provide examples. I mean, there are laws that make complete sense. Laws against child pornography for example.

I'd like to suggest that perhaps the laws that make sense to you are those against behavior that harms people without their consent - child pornography, for example. Laws against behavior that harms no one, or at least no one who isn't involved voluntarily, have never made sense to me.

 

[Redmage]

But since it may be "judgemental" of me to "assume and presume"....

Actuallly you can assume anything you like, as far as I'm concerned, as long as you don't attempt to give your assumptions moral or legal power over other people's lives. I'm quite serious when I say that behavior that does no involuntary harm to anyone should be completely unrestricted. That includes any presumptions you might feel called on to make.

If two lovers (of any sexual persuasion) were in front of you, holding hands and standing on the edge of the bay bridge about to jump off to their deaths, does your "live and let die as long as it involves two adults engaged in consensual activity" prevent you from intervening in their suicide, because its " their business when and how to end their life, if they choose to do so", as you say?

I'd talk to them, if they were willing to talk. My advice to anyone considering suicide is "procrastinate." Tomorrow is usually soon enough to kill yourself, if you still want to do so then. But if my arguments didn't persuade them, or they simply chose not to discuss the matter, then I wouldn't intervene physically or call in the police to do it for me.

I gather from the form of your question that you would attempt to stop them, by force if necessary. If I'm reading that right, can you explain what gives you the wisdom and authority to decide what's best for other people?

 

[Ticklerguy4u]

I had a friend who said his girlfriend wanted to experiece the "choking" thing. Unfortunately, the moron DID actually choke her! She is fine but I really doubt she'll actually ask him to do it again. When he told me this, I was like..."You ass, you aren't actually supposed to choke her."

This is a warning to women that like it..be careful who you ask. Some guys don't know the difference between reality and roleplay. That goes for guys in here that consider it taboo. None of you can decipher the difference, I would definitely stay away from anything kinky and keep to regular vanilla sex. For you are probably unqualified to do anything else and YOU would hurt the woman. Leave it to those who can see the difference.

And as for guys who seem to think that women are weird for requesting things that you would consider unatural. You aren't a woman ( I think?) Stop acting like you are actually concerned about their welfare and think that women are the lesser beings and don't know what they like sexually. Stay vanilla...you are way to adolencent to get your clumsy hands enough to know a woman's body or desires.

 

[Redmage]

I don't think there is. I can totally dig the idea of self-respect. Like maybe you don't want to do something because you think it's disrespecting yourself... I think that's fine. You should just call it what it is though... It's about you and your boundaries, not the other person.

Drew's right in a very limited sense: respecting a woman doesn't require you to give her what she wants. Your choices are just as free as hers, and the fact that something is right for her doesn't mean that it's right for you. But respect DOES require you to keep your moral and legal nose out of her business, so long as she's not harming anyone who does not choose to accept that.

Interfering in someone else's consensual choices is justifiable only if you know what's best for them better than they know themselves. There's simply no way around this, because if you DON'T have that knowledge then what are you doing mucking about in their lives? ("You" is being used generically rather than personally here.)

We can justify this claim of superior wisdom in the case of children, for example. But then anyone who presumes to override the free decisions of an adult woman is necessarily treating her like a child. There is simply no way to argue that this is respectful of her in any shape or form.

 

[drew70]

It's no more ridiculous than comparing the activities of two lovers with that of terrorists. The intent isn't to asphyxiate (which by definition is to kill), it's to deprive one of a little blood flow which causes the light headed feeling (and the psychological aspects of submissiveness).

I'm not making any such comparison whatsoever. What I'm doing is refuting the notion that consent makes anything and everything okay, by pointing out examples in which people can consentually engage in an activity and still be wrong. Why am I doing this? Because you said things like,

"Ummmm... Everything between consenting adults **is** okay."

"I think that two consenting adults have every right to do whatever the hell they want to in private."​

So by bringing up admittedly extreme examples, I'm demonstrating that not only do I not believe it, but YOU don't believe it either.

You don't think the sports I mentioned have risks? When was the last time you jumped out of a plane? White-water rafting?

My apologies. That was a typo. I meant to say those sports DO have risks.

A quick scan of this thread will show I've neither said nor implied any such thing. Many people, both men and women, can and do know their own boundaries. But there is a lot more to the concept of respect than simply giving somebody anything for which they ask.

I don't think there is. I can totally dig the idea of self-respect. Like maybe you don't want to do something because you think it's disrespecting yourself... I think that's fine. You should just call it what it is though... It's about you and your boundaries, not the other person.

I too can dig the concept of self-respect, but that's not what we're talking about. I'm talking about respecting a woman too much to consider choking or asphyxiating her for any reason.

Talk is cheap? Is this supposed to be a pearl of wisdom?

Nope. Just common sense.

You'd politely refuse because of your own boundaries, not out of respect for her.

Both, actually. I'd politely refuse because something that disrespects her so blatantly is outside my boundaries.

Yeah... But I can't understand what you are trying to say... Maybe some proper sentence structure or punctuation is needed? Totally serious there. Not trying to be a dick.

Fair enough. My apologies for not being clear the first time.

You said, "Just because being choked is linked to *your* dignity..."

to which I replied, "Being choked is not linked to *my* dignity at all, nor is my dignity at issue here. Like most people, I would say that NOT being choked would be a much truer link to anybody's dignity."

I'm refuting your claim that being choked is a link to my dignity. If somebody chokes me, I would not feel nor appear dignified, and I dare say neither would anybody else in such a situation. Ergo, being choked is not a link to my dignity, as you say. Quite the contrary, if I'm not being choked, there is a freedom to breath easily and to speak clearly, which is far more dignified than being choked. Hence, I would say that NOT being choked is a much more valid link to anybody's dignity than being choked would be.

This whole conversation has centered around what two consenting adults do to each other. If you think that my having to dumb that statement down to be better understood has won this point for you, then so be it.

I don't believe either of us has won or lost anything. You've proved my point, that while it sounds good and very progressive to say that "Anything two consenting adults do is okay" it fails under the mildest scrutiny, and that "consent" is not the vast umbrella of justification that some claim it to be.

By the way, your list has now grown to

Anything two people do is okay "as long as..."

1) There is consent

2) Those involved are adults

3) It's done in private

4) Nobody else gets hurt

5) They do it to each other

I could keep bringing up other things you've not considered that fulfill all these requirements yet you'd still consider wrong, requiring yet another addition to the list.

Does this prove that men choking women is wrong? No, not at all. All it does is invalidate the reasoning by which you insist I've no grounds to object to such choking. You say it's okay because "anything two consenting adults do is okay." Well, I've demonstrated that neither of us believe that, so if you still want to insist I've no grounds on which to object to men choking women, you're going to have to come up with another line of reasoning.

Two people getting off on plotting a crime is much different than two people committing a crime.

Who said anything about "getting off"? Do I need to add THAT to the list as well? The question was is do you think it's okay for two consenting adults to plot a crime? I'm talking about crimes such as armed robbery, rape, embezzlement, etc.

 

[jaba]

Actuallly you can assume anything you like, as far as I'm concerned, as long as you don't attempt to give your assumptions moral or legal power over other people's lives. I'm quite serious when I say that behavior that does no involuntary harm to anyone should be completely unrestricted. That includes any presumptions you might feel called on to make.

I'd talk to them, if they were willing to talk. My advice to anyone considering suicide is "procrastinate." Tomorrow is usually soon enough to kill yourself, if you still want to do so then. But if my arguments didn't persuade them, or they simply chose not to discuss the matter, then I wouldn't intervene physically or call in the police to do it for me.

I gather from the form of your question that you would attempt to stop them, by force if necessary. If I'm reading that right, can you explain what gives you the wisdom and authority to decide what's best for other people?

It wouldn't be about my "wisdom and authority", Redmage..."wisdom and authority" would probably never even enter the equasion for me in such a scenario.......it would be about me being a human being, and and being unable to stand by and watch another human being jump from a bridge to their death without my attempts at any and all intervention I could make to prevent such an act.....I don't have the capacity in my heart NOT to intervene in such a scenario, Redmage.....

You better believe it, I ABSOLUTELY, by FORCE if necessary, would try my ass off to stop an individual, adult or otherwise, from jumping off a bridge if I could....and their "adult" status would not make them "off limits" to my intervention attempts....I would try anything humanly possible.....

You know what? In my opinion, this thread and conversation is starting to take on a cold and clinical tone that is personally disappointing, and quite frankly offensive to me......

I understanding that all of us here believe in our positions on this topic, but it never occurred to me that not only would some of you here NOT try to intervene , if you could safely do so, if you saw a young adult or couple trying to contemplating suicide by jumping from a bridge, some here apparently would find it an offense to their "moral code" to even call the police, or other assistance, to prevent the suicide attempt....merely because the suicidal man or woman is an adult, and by your consensus making an "adult" consensual decision?

I mean, an 18 year old boy or girl may be an "adult" by legal definition....but forgive my offense to the "moral code" of some of you here, that person is sometimes still a kid, with perspectives and perceptions that a kid would have......unlike some of you here, in my opinion, I would feel it to be my moral obligation to try by all and any means possible to prevent their suicide if I could safely do so.....and quite frankly, Redmage, I really feel embarrassed that I am here trying to defend my feelings and reactions and opinions in this regard.....

Apparently I am different from a lot of you here......I mean, its one thing to sit here with legs crossed and intellectually discuss the merits of adult consensual activity, but Redmage, I'm sorry....I'm afraid I don't have your strength of "moral character" in this regard.....I would do anything safely and humanly possible, ANYTHING, to prevent this person from committing suicide in front of me.....and quite frankly, if I knew inside that I did not do everything I possibly could to prevent that man or lady from jumping to their death from a bridge, that would haunt me for the rest of my life.....I know I personally would never be the same.....

Shit........I actually feel physically drained, and I feel my heart sinking in my chest, listening to some of the sentiments of some of you in this thread.....

So....what happens now, Redmage? I guess I applaud you for being able to maintain the "strength and courage of your convictions", and not even calling for assistance, while being able to watch an "adult" jump to their death from a bridge?

There's no way on earth I could do something like that....

 

[ViperGTS]

You better believe it, I ABSOLUTELY, by FORCE if necessary, would try my ass off to stop an individual, adult or otherwise, from jumping off a bridge if I could....and their "adult" status would not make them "off limits" to my intervention attempts....I would try anything humanly possible.....

Now, I have a question. And I'm not arguing with you here, jaba, I'm simply asking for your reasoning behind it...

What gives you the right to interfere with someone else's decision like that?

 

[Ace Riley]

Wow... this thread got stupid as hell, rather quickly.

Suicide, and pretend choking are two completely different things.

If you think they are even remotely similar, you're either stupid as hell, or looking to cause drama for drama's sake. I mean, just to spike the punch! To get some attention... because honestly the point has been made SO ABUNDANTLY clear that to keep contesting it is short of insanity on your part.

What two consenting adults do within the boundaries of the law and their own moral code is between them. If she wants me to shit on a plate and serve it to her with a dash of garlic then she's syck as hell, but YOU are safely out of her "give a fuck zone".

Suicide is someone killing themselves. Aiding it is a freakin' crime. Not to mention death is not exactly something that affects only self. It's complications go far beyond play-acting, role-playing and fantasy scenarios, or even pain inducing activities. Such as whips, needles and blood draw.

Honestly, it'll be the day before this fetish forum ever truly understands the concept of an open fetish. I think some of us are really spoiled. I grew up feeling that the love of tickling was dark, morbid and freaking creepy. I lived in a closed off world where nobody knew what I felt. Here I come to the TMF with their open arms and understanding, yet grown adults on this forum to this day can't apply it when the parameters are in the context of other fetish activity?

No wonder it's hard to take this fetish seriously on the net.

 

[BellaRisa]

It wouldn't be about my "wisdom and authority", Redmage...
There's no way on earth I could do something like that....

See, here's where it gets very, very difficult for some of us, and why there are sometimes no specific right answers.
I agree with you, Jaba. There is no way I could allow some mother's child to permanently end his life if I could possibly stop it.

And yet, I don't feel that I have the right to do so. And yes, I know that doesn't make sense.

I have *very* strong beliefs regarding the soul and the next lives, not in the christian vein but along other lines, and I honestly believe that there are those who know when it's their time to move on, by their own hand. This life is very precious, but so are the next ones. And it's not my place to interfere with their path. BUT, they damn sure need to be far away from me when they choose to move on, because I'd have to do everything in my power to stop them. I couldn't help it, it's who I am. And frankly I strongly believe that it's the responsibility of anyone ready to leave this world to do so without damaging others if at all possible. That means no leaving people behind who depend on you and weren't prepared for your leaving, no jumping off bridges and traumatizing all kinds of folks...that kinda thing. Your suicide is YOUR business, not the beginning of another round of therapy for those around you.

This is by no means a simple situation.

Bella

 

[jaba]

Now, I have a question. And I'm not arguing with you here, jaba, I'm simply asking for your reasoning behind it...

What gives you the right to interfere with someone else's decision like that?

I take no offense at all to your question, Viper....no problem....

I fully acknowledge that I may have NO RIGHT at all to interfere.....my decision may be against the code of conduct for everyone else here, and I can live fine with that....

But I'm saying, for me, my heart, and my "moral code" would not let me stand by and watch someone jump to their death without me trying to intervene.....and I have absolutely no problem being judged "morally wrong" by some of you.....I'm saying it would be harder for me to live with my lack of intervention attempt than with the contempt of some here for my "interference" and intervention attempts.....

I mean, shit, a thousand things at once would be going through my mind in that scenario......

"What if this lady is drunk and just broke up with her boy friend and may not be thinking rationally?"

Could this poor guy or girl be a mother or father whose suicidal act would devastatingly affect their children?

What horrific situation could exist in the mind of this person to make them contemplate this? Are they just out of money? Shit, they are welcome to my life savings if they reconsider killing themselves.....money and possessions can be replaced....their life cannot....have they rationally examined alternatives?

I read an article in my local paper about a destitute mother who lost custody of her kids in court.....

After the judges ruling, she immediately went to the roof of the court house and jumped to her death....

Was this her "adult" decision? Of course it was.....would I have had a "right" to interfere with her decision if I was in a position to stop her suicide? In the eyes of many of you here, probably not.....

But I'm telling you, I would have tried everything in my power humanly possible to stop that mother from jumping off that roof.....and I remember crying all day when I read that story....

So, forgive me, folks....I have absolutely no problem at all interfering with the "right" and decision of that mother in that situation to jump off that court house roof......and I have even less of a problem with the "moral condemnation" of some of you here for me interfering with her "rights"......believe it or not, I would wear your "condemnation" as proudly as a badge....

my basic compassion and humanity would overwhelmingly compel me to intervene in such a horrific scenario..... there is no way that I could not and would NOT act in that circumstance.....and I would not think twice about my actions and intervention.....and I would find it impossible to live with myself, if I did not try all means available to intervene.....

 

[Majestic]

Why is it that every girl I know right now likes to be choked? Not hurt but they all seem to enjoy having a hand put around their neck and gently squeezed, inducing heavier breathing. Also it's an awesome feeling of control for me.

Who on here enjoys a little strangulation?

Before I start, let me grab my tomato reflecting body armor. Now, correct me if I am wrong......which I have no doubt some of you will. =0) I dont see anywhere in the original post where it says "Why is it that every girl I know now likes to have me put my hands around her neck and squeeze really hard till she almost passes out just so she can have a screaming orgasm?" I thought that this was a simple, easy to answer, getting-to-know you kinda question. SOOOOOOO...I answered it simple and easy enough. No problem. I like a little neck squeeze from my partner. Kinda gets me going. Next thing I know we're talking domestic violence, child abuse, snuff films, jumping off bridges, boinking in a car while inhaling carbon dioxide or monoxide..whatever. I wonder if I went to an erotic asyphixation forum and asked "why is it every guy/girl I know now wants me to tickle them or tie me up and tickle me?"...if I did would it turn into a "you are a freak" thread? Maybe I should try it. Yeah..I came out of lurkdom to hear other TMF'ers experiences, maybe learn a thing or two and read other people's opinions but DANG!! This one has gone waaaaaay overboard....IN MY OPINION!! Which I am obviously entitled to by reading this whole thread. Anyway...Im getting off my soap box, taking off my body armor and going back to the Tickle Discussion forum where it's safe. OH...p/s...I am only 50 posts away from bein' an EXPERT so please dont hurt me.

 

[Ace Riley]

Meh, Majestic. Most people here are just emo. :3 Nothing to worry about.

LoL seriously, for as fun as alot of people sound, you come here and the emo comes out. Someone call the Waaaaahmbuuulance, I say.

It's a simple topic, on a fun forum. Some folk should leave the soap boxes and drama at home. This thread went overboard a long time ago, for no reason that to attract attention to themselves.

 

[jaba]

Meh, Majestic. Most people here are just emo. :3 Nothing to worry about.

LoL seriously, for as fun as alot of people sound, you come here and the emo comes out. Someone call the Waaaaahmbuuulance, I say.

It's a simple topic, on a fun forum. Some folk should leave the soap boxes and drama at home. This thread went overboard a long time ago, for no reason that to attract attention to themselves.

Hey you know what ace? With all due respect, this is about the second or third thread you have inserted your opinion about the direction and tone of a thread topic, and have expressed your opinion of the motivations of the posters on such threads....

The fact of the matter is, everybody is respectfully and articulately discussing points here, and the actual CREATOR of the thread, and a TMF Moderator, is engaged in this discussion, and asking for elaboration on points here that have been made.....

Most folks who object to the direction and content of a thread simply leave and go to another thread that more suits their interests...

So I guess my point is, if the creator of this thread, and the Moderators of this forum have no problem with the direction, and "drama" as you put it, that this thread is taking, why is there this burning need in you to play "mini moderator", and question the flow, and question the motivations of those participating here?

 

[lk70]

Topics like this come up once in awhile and the same people post the same kinds of opinions every time. I don't know why we do it, except to me it kind of feels like one of those late night, bottle of wine discussions among thinking, curious people.

In some cases, the participants are vituperative and really really don't like each other, but for the most part, despite the tone some of the posts take, we have a decent amount of respect for each other. It's easy to have philosophical discussions about suicide and terrorism and all those other extreme examples and that's all this is.

I don't think Jaba has a corrupted moral code because he'd interfere physically with someone trying to leave this life. I think that's the sign of a loving and caring person (no matter what he thinks and I note that while my opinion was the same as RedMage's, Jaba was careful to only direct his comments to him. That would be chivalry )

I don't think it's as dramatic as it appears in print. I could be wrong. It's been known to happen, once in a very rare while.

 

[BellaRisa]

I'm kinda bummed that I found a place where I can freely discuss an interest in tickling without having to worry about what people may think, only to discover that I'm going to have be very careful with everything else I say if I don't want to start some moral shit-storm.

Denver, a lot of members feel this way when they first start posting. Don't worry about it, express yourself the way you feel! To be blunt, if you just put a few folks on your ignore filter when needed and continue your conversation with the people who actually listen, you'll be fine and you won't feel the need to censor yourself 😉

Bella

 

[Redmage]

It wouldn't be about my "wisdom and authority", Redmage..."wisdom and authority" would probably never even enter the equasion for me in such a scenario.......it would be about me being a human being, and and being unable to stand by and watch another human being jump from a bridge to their death without my attempts at any and all intervention I could make to prevent such an act.....I don't have the capacity in my heart NOT to intervene in such a scenario, Redmage.....

I think that wisdom and authority had better enter into it. If wisdom and authority don't back up a decision like that, then it's a very, very bad decision.

If I seem cold and unemotional about this, then I'm sorry, but in a sense it's necessary. I wouldn't like to watch someone die. Emotionally I would prefer to stop it. But ethically I realize that giving in to that emotion would mean exercising an authority that I don't have, and claiming a degree of wisdom I could never attain. It would mean claiming that I know another person's needs better than they do, and making the most critical decision possible without the tools I need to do it right. That would be wrong. So I have to get a grip on my emotions, take them out of the way, and confine myself rigidly to the things that lie within my capacity. That's the right thing to do, but it's not the easy thing.

Ace, I agree that the matter of suicide never needed to be introduced here, since it's poles apart from what we were talking about. It came in as the beginning of a slippery slope argument: the assumption was that naturally anyone would find suicide unacceptable, and with that foot in the door it would move toward the argument that we have the same right to intervene in consensual sexual activity.

The problem was it didn't happen that way. Suicide might be illegal, but that doesn't mean it should be. The state sticks its nose in many places where it doesn't belong, and this is one of them. As I said to Jaba, anyone who doesn't believe they know what's best for others has no business telling anyone else when and how they're allowed to die. And anyone who does believe they know what's best for others is a far greater threat to life and liberty than any suicide could be.

It really doesn't matter that, in the broadest sense, the death of one person affects more than that person. That's true in the broad sense of most things we humans do. Choosing to remain alive, or even choosing to give birth, will usually affect a wide range of people, some of whom may wish that the choice had gone the other way. That doesn't give them the right to dictate that choice in either direction.

 

[Ace Riley]

Hey you know what ace? With all due respect, this is about the second or third thread you have inserted your opinion about the direction and tone of a thread topic, and have expressed your opinion of the motivations of the posters on such threads....

The fact of the matter is, everybody is respectfully and articulately discussing points here, and the actual CREATOR of the thread, and a TMF Moderator, is engaged in this discussion, and asking for elaboration on points here that have been made.....

Most folks who object to the direction and content of a thread simply leave and go to another thread that more suits their interests...

So I guess my point is, if the creator of this thread, and the Moderators of this forum have no problem with the direction, and "drama" as you put it, that this thread is taking, why is there this burning need in you to play "mini moderator", and question the flow, and question the motivations of those participating here?

When it gets so ridiculous as to make people scared to even voice an opinion because some take an initial post out of context. I'm going to point it out. The original post was taken ridiculously out of context for the sole purpose of what?

Proving your point? What point were you trying to make? Plenty of people come and validate the opinion, repeat it, and somehow it goes through one ear and out the other.

Trolling can be entertaining for some, don't expect me to sit by and watch you one-hand fap to it.

Have you ignored what Denver_Tickling and Majestic posted? Irrelevant flames and trolling is not needed if you're trying to prove a point. Don't mask yourself in semantics when this post was done with a positive tone and a downward spin was introduced for jollies.

I'm fine with people having differing views. That's not even my point, this is a discussion forum, and people have different ideas. However I see it time and again, this endless discourse that makes it so that one can't even feel free to speak out safely without being flamed for it?

This thread started out on the topic of someone posting about a fetish that others might have found apprehensible. This is fine, and I'm sure the OP is confident enough in himself and what he loves to not be bothered by it. However the audacity of challenging someones preferences have to be voiced so loudly as to compare it to intervention of suicide? Protection of human life?

Where are you going with this? Seriously.

 

[jaba]

I think that wisdom and authority had better enter into it. If wisdom and authority don't back up a decision like that, then it's a very, very bad decision.

And its a decision that I fully acknowledge you think may be very very bad, and its a decision I would fully embrace, despite your distaste for that decision....I could live with your distaste....I could not live with my lack of any and all available intervention, if such a scenario unfortunately arose......

If I seem cold and unemotional about this, then I'm sorry, but in a sense it's necessary. I wouldn't like to watch someone die. Emotionally I would prefer to stop it. But ethically I realize that giving in to that emotion would mean exercising an authority that I don't have, and claiming a degree of wisdom I could never attain. It would mean claiming that I know another person's needs better than they do, and making the most critical decision possible without the tools I need to do it right. That would be wrong. So I have to get a grip on my emotions, take them out of the way, and confine myself rigidly to the things that lie within my capacity. That's the right thing to do, but it's not the easy thing.

I respect your outlook, Redmage, though I feel just the opposite......frankly, I hope I never gain the "degree of wisdom" and absence of emotion necessary to sit back and watch someone jump off a bridge and die, without me exausting all measures of intervention that are safely available to me, including force....to me, "non intervention" would be wrong , and I hope to never have the "grip on my emotions" that would to allow something like a suicide bridge jump to take place while I watched and did not try all available avenues to prevent it.......ethically, for me, not giving in to that "emotion" would be wrong.....

But I obviously hope we both never have to face such a horrific situation, and I respect the strength of your convictions, and your articulate defense of your position......we just will have to agree to disagree, I guess..... 🙂

 

[jaba]

Topics like this come up once in awhile and the same people post the same kinds of opinions every time. I don't know why we do it, except to me it kind of feels like one of those late night, bottle of wine discussions among thinking, curious people.

In some cases, the participants are vituperative and really really don't like each other, but for the most part, despite the tone some of the posts take, we have a decent amount of respect for each other. It's easy to have philosophical discussions about suicide and terrorism and all those other extreme examples and that's all this is.

I don't think Jaba has a corrupted moral code because he'd interfere physically with someone trying to leave this life. I think that's the sign of a loving and caring person (no matter what he thinks and I note that while my opinion was the same as RedMage's, Jaba was careful to only direct his comments to him. That would be chivalry )

I don't think it's as dramatic as it appears in print. I could be wrong. It's been known to happen, once in a very rare while.

Thanks Lk...... 🙂 I realize we all may have divergent opinions, but sometimes I feel like my opinions are so "off base" here that I fear my little ice block is in danger of being pushed away from the TMF eskimo glacier village..... 😛

 

[drew70]

I agree. This went wayyyyyy overboard a long time ago.

Drew, you and I disagree. Rephrasing the same damn things over and over and over (and over) again isn't going to make us see things in a different light. I respect your point of view, I just don't agree with it. I think we're done discussing this.

Just an observation from a TMF newbie... I see a lot of threads where there seems to be a handful of people (almost always the same ones) that pounce and start preaching right and wrong. This thread being a perfect example.

I'm kinda bummed that I found a place where I can freely discuss an interest in tickling without having to worry about what people may think, only to discover that I'm going to have be very careful with everything else I say if I don't want to start some moral shit-storm.

Works for me, pal. No hard feelings at this end. As for avoiding moral shitstorms by "putting a few folks on your ignore filter," I can only laugh at such a suggestion, unless you're prepared to put a third of the forum members on ignore. The bottom line is that everybody has their own code of morals and ethics, even those that habitually disdain virtually anybody who raises a moral objection to any particular practice.