Do girls in renfaire clips know whats coming?

[Master Baiter]

Maybe they really did tell you this, I don't know... but I still don't believe anyone would actually do it.

You're expecting us to believe that if your friends were shown blowing up a balloon in the scenario you describe, they would literally call a lawyer, make an appointment, agree to shell out attorney's fees in advance, and devote many hours of personal time, potentially also taking time off work, to take someone to court? Really?

I just don't believe it.

I don't believe it for a second either.

It's easy to say "I'll sue the hell out of them", but when it comes down to forking over $$$ for a retainer fee (assuming IF they can find a lawyer who would take such a ridiculous case), it's all a bunch of internet tough-talk and empty threats.

 

[rhiannon]

I know someone who sued about a similar thing...and won. But anyways, it is beside the point if they would actually sue or not - the simple fact that they would get upset enough to even think about it should clarify that what happens is wrong.

 

[Master Baiter]

If these videos were just posted on Youtube, I totally agree!

They are just posted on YouTube and not for sale.

Tickling is a part of human interaction, that kind of tickle does not require permission!

Thanks you so much for laying out the ground rules and speaking for everyone.


You really can't seem to make up your mind:
"I'd sue them" vs. "It doesn't matter if I sue or not, it's still wrong".

What you're doing is called flip-flopping.
The result is a loss of credibility.

Your amateur lawyer status is in jeopardy.

 

[brotherted]

"WELL, LET'S SEE, are ya TICKLISH?? --- OH you ARE, OK, FUN FOR ME!!! Who gives a crap what you want!!! I'm gonna tickle you
---- for any extended time --- however long *I want --- my choice of feet, sides, armpits, neck --- with no escape hatch
*

Perhaps we've found the essence of our disagreement -- for me there is an "escape hatch" -- it's the standard I personally apply, and believe is also applied in the RenFaire scenarios -- it's simply whether the girl looks like she's having fun, or whether she looks like she's being violated.

If any girl looks genuinely pissed, unhappy, traumatized, violated or angry, she should be granted an Elizabethan "pardon." As long as they do that, and there's no evidence to suggest they don't, then I'm fine with it. Seems to me they'd have no interest in generating complaints to the management, and so they'd want to stop right away with any such person.

All we know is what we see -- and unless you can point me to a video where someone looks angry or traumatized, I'm not going to just assume it's happening.

🙂

 

[rhiannon]

They are just posted on YouTube and not for sale.

As far as I read, you can order those clips on videotape. For free??

Thanks you so much for laying out the ground rules and speaking for everyone.

I did not speak for everyone. I was asked about MY opinion and and I voiced MY opinion.

"I'd sue them" vs. "It doesn't matter if I sue or not, it's still wrong".

What you're doing is called flip-flopping.
The result is a loss of credibility.

I am not flip-flopping, you don't understand my point!

Plus, I would definitely sue....I don't know if others actually would or not.

But there are a lot of women who get beaten up by their husbands and they don't sue them....doesn't make it right. And no, I do not want to compare one thing to the other, I am just giving an example so maybe it is easier for some people to understand what I am talking about.

 

[Master Baiter]

I know someone who sued about a similar thing...and won. But anyways, it is beside the point if they would actually sue or not - the simple fact that they would get upset enough to even think about it should clarify that what happens is wrong.

Sure you do. It was on the People's Court.

Just because someone "gets upset" doesn't mean there was a miscarriage of justice, grounds for a lawsuit, or even that they were simply wronged.

 

[rhiannon]

Not because someone got upset, but if someone is filmed and that material is sold or published without their consent, that is indeed grounds for a lawsuit, at least in this country, and since in the US even hot coffee is a reason for a lawsuit, I highly doubt it is different there!

 

[Ace Riley]

Yes, you just illustrated your own point.

No, I didn't. I remember precisely a time a thread like this could be created with peace of mind without fear of people flaming each other. Hell, I didn't even mention you, and you knew still felt compelled to reply. You KNOW what you are doing to this forum. You know.

Continue at your leisure though. At least not all threads are this crisp. If you have more to say, keep it in my PM box. Thanks.

 

[Master Baiter]

As far as I read, you can order those clips on videotape. For free??

You couldn't be more wrong.
What you see on YouTube are remnants of old VHS tapes. They are out of print.

I did not speak for everyone. I was asked about MY opinion and and I voiced MY opinion.
I am not flip-flopping, you don't understand my point!

I understand your point quite well.
You are trying to pass off your personal opinion as a moral compass for the rest of us to follow.
If we don't agree, then we're wrong and immoral. Easy enough.

Plus, I would definitely sue....I don't know if others actually would or not.

Now you're back to suing. Again. You'll actually lay out the money and take the time to file a lawsuit.
As others have stated, "I doubt it". Talk is cheap.

But there are a lot of women who get beaten up by their husbands and they don't sue them....doesn't make it right. And no, I do not want to compare one thing to the other, I am just giving an example so maybe it is easier for some people to understand what I am talking about.

Thanks for dumbing it down for us idiots who don't know the difference between real physical abuse and Renfaire tickling.

You are comparing, and you've just insulted anyone who's ever been an abuse victim.
Congratulations.

 

[rhiannon]

What you see on YouTube are remnants of old VHS tapes. They are out of print.

I'm not sure I understand what this means. Care to elaborate?

You are trying to pass off your personal opinion as a moral compass for the rest of us to follow.
If we don't agree, then we're wrong and immoral. Easy enough.

I give my opinion. If some people agree, fine. If everybody agreed, that would be pretty boring because there wouldn't be a discussion! If I find certain things immoral, that is my business. Why does it upset you? 🙂

You'll actually lay out the money and take the time to file a lawsuit.

I wouldn't have to lay out the money, I have insurance for that. And yes, I would take the time to file a lawsuit. And as I said, I know people who did. It was not the same circumstances, but it was about photo material that got published without permission.

Thanks for dumbing it down for us idiots who don't know the difference between real physical abuse and Renfaire tickling.

I did not compare renfair tickling to beating someone up, not for one second! I did bring up an example where something that was not legal does not get brought to justice, and that it doesn't get brought to justice does not make it any more legal! That was all I am trying to illustrate!

By the way, I don't even think that these women were mad, traumatized or anything else about being tickled there - I actually believe they did have a good time!

 

[tkl-pen]

Perhaps for the first one it's a surprise but I think any of the girls to follow must know for sure!

 

[nenezinho]

Perhaps for the first one it's a surprise but I think any of the girls to follow must know for sure!

Yep!!! i think we have reached an agreement that most of them must be somewhat aware of what´s going on.

Everything else is just off-topic....altough i did enjoy a little "fight" over it 🙂

 

[Babbles]

I've read everything now.

No, I didn't. I remember precisely a time a thread like this could be created with peace of mind without fear of people flaming each other. Hell, I didn't even mention you, and you knew still felt compelled to reply. You KNOW what you are doing to this forum. You know.

Continue at your leisure though. At least not all threads are this crisp. If you have more to say, keep it in my PM box. Thanks.

Guess what. You not only TROLLED this thread --- You flamed me, "you KNOW" damn well you posted that comment pointedly & immediately after mine to refer to it, in fact you admit it here freely ---

----So don't pretend I have reason to identify with trolls like yourself who have crapped up the forum

when you made it quite obvious you were reacting to my RELEVANT RESPONSE in this thread which, uh coincidentally was --- right above your unnecessary, irrelevant & hypocritical comment.

You have been obnoxious & rude far too often, you're one of the VERY LAST people who can refer to anyone ELSE as a "troll" 🙄 much less complain about the atmosphere ---- extraordinary gall....

---- while making inflammatory posts that ARE NOT RELEVANT TO THE THREAD, no less.
You had no business making a nasty pointless comment & then acting ridiculously holier-than-thou.
You want to continue this in PM, go right ahead ----- You should've done exactly that rather than flaming me publicly to begin.

 

[Gentler]

I give my opinion. If some people agree, fine. If everybody agreed, that would be pretty boring because there wouldn't be a discussion! If I find certain things immoral, that is my business. Why does it upset you? 🙂

Probably for the same reason it upsets me and no doubt countless others. Disagreement is one thing. But you (along with a couple of others) make these moral pronouncements that noncon tickling is wrong wrong wrong. Then when somebody calls you on it, you back-pedal and say, "oh I'm just giving my own personal opinion," when in reality, this so-called personal opinion was delivered as cold, hard, etched-in-stone, universal fact. Your back-pedaling and flip-flopping is amusing at best but hardly supports your arguments in any way.

I did not compare renfair tickling to beating someone up, not for one second! I did bring up an example where something that was not legal does not get brought to justice, and that it doesn't get brought to justice does not make it any more legal! That was all I am trying to illustrate!

And how is that not a comparison???

See what I mean? You flip-flop constantly, and when you're not flip-flopping you are back-pedaling. Please. Just quit it.

 

[Babbles]

Convoluted "logic."

Perhaps for the first one it's a surprise but I think any of the girls to follow must know for sure!

They "must" know?? They're tourists in a crowd --- Whether it's a surprise for one --- and it's apparently a surprise for many --- that's obviously not right, doubly wrong since it's taped....

Yep!!! i think we have reached an agreement that most of them must be somewhat aware of what´s going on.

Everything else is just off-topic....altough i did enjoy a little "fight" over it 🙂

How can you reach that "agreement?" Who's agreeing, a couple of you guys who feel it's no problem to trick bystanders??? You can't assume you know what anyone else is thinking,

and those women do look SURPRISED --- which is what some here say is the point & the fun part ----

Which is not acceptable since if they come along 10-15 minutes apart ---- they probably don't expect it, especially since as it's been pointed out (---- they're surprised!!)

Those who DO know either avoid it --- or maybe some ticklephiles are there & get lucky, that's great.

There is just NO EXCUSE for not having the decency & courtesy to inform them so they're not upset. AGAIN, you'll never see THAT footage --- And there's a good chance that's *why this underhanded creep had to stop producing these sneaky videos....

Thanks for dumbing it down for us idiots who don't know the difference between real physical abuse and Renfaire tickling.

You are comparing, and you've just insulted anyone who's ever been an abuse victim.
Congratulations.

Someone apparently does need to explain basic GOLDEN RULES to you.

There are obviously DEGREES of abuse ---- NONE of them are acceptable, and if you disagree with that,
as you apparently do,

Congratulations, you're inhumane & anti-social. Which you've admitted too ---- Your answer was:
"IT'S MY FUN AND THAT'S TOO BAD FOR THE VICTIM"

Here's my answer:

I love non-con.
I love the element of surprise.
I am not going to jail because of it. Ever.
I have company. Lots of it.

It's up to you to decide if you'll ever get over it and just accept my preferences.

so you obviously don't care if some women ARE traumatized by finding they're to be tickled ----
which is to be touched for stimulation and reaction ---- NOT everyone is comfortable with that ----
and many have had traumatic experiences in their youth ----

Edit: NO I'M NOT ONE OF THEM, quit using that as a distraction ---- Either way, you're still an abuser.

---You who say "TOO BAD" are abusers by proxy. And you ENACT Non-Con???

You touch someone sexually, you purposely stimulate & cause a nervous response which is unwilling and highly uncomfortable for some --- you touch a woman inappropriately without her consent in such a manner ----
You do belong in jail.

Probably for the same reason it upsets me and no doubt countless others. Disagreement is one thing. But you (along with a couple of others) make these moral pronouncements that noncon tickling is wrong wrong wrong. Then when somebody calls you on it, you back-pedal and say, "oh I'm just giving my own personal opinion," when in reality, this so-called personal opinion was delivered as cold, hard, etched-in-stone, universal fact. Your back-pedaling and flip-flopping is amusing at best but hardly supports your arguments in any way.

And how is that not a comparison???

See what I mean? You flip-flop constantly, and when you're not flip-flopping you are back-pedaling. Please. Just quit it.

.... how is it that you sound suspiciously similar to Master Baiter? These new upstart word-twisting profiles are awfully convenient & rather clone-like...

More importantly, how can you DEFEND Non-Con? Attacking someone who's immobilized or in any way unable to prevent the attack is more obviously wrong than the nose I assume is on one or both of your faces....

"Please, just quit it" sounds like what NON-CON VICTIMS SAY --- But according to YOU --- and/or MasterBaiter, and others here, trolls or not,

such pleas are false and should be ignored
because you're really enjoying every second of the negative feedback you're instigating...
though in this circumstance that does appear to be the case...

So who's flip-flopping?? We're supposed to shut up & support random jerks having fun at other people's expense because it'll ruin your fun,
who cares if the woman doesn't want it, much less on tape ---

but by your own statements supporting NON-CONSENTUAL TORTURE --- your requests should be ignored, since you don't honor anyone else's.

 

[FeatherMAN28]

*gets out the popcorn*....watches people arguing

 

[ElFewja]

I love popcorn.

Fishstick?

Etc.

 

[Master Baiter]

so you obviously don't care if some women ARE traumatized by finding they're to be tickled ----
which is to be touched for stimulation and reaction ---- NOT everyone is comfortable with that ----
and many have had traumatic experiences in their youth ----

This is the root of all evil for you right here.
You're bringing your personal "trauma" into this topic and projecting it onto everyone else.

To be honest, I don't give two shits what happened to you when you were young. Get some counseling if you need to, but leave the non-con lovers the hell out of your psychosis.

 

[topdog]

WOW!

I cant believe you people are even giving this MORALITY LECTURE any credence. Also, whoever hasn't clicked the play button to one of these RenVids please raise your hand......

And for all of this, I know someone who sued over something similar to this gibberish, PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!! It is so easy to through spaghetti up to the ceiling and see what sticks!

 

[rhiannon]

Disagreement is one thing. But you (along with a couple of others) make these moral pronouncements that noncon tickling is wrong wrong wrong. Then when somebody calls you on it, you back-pedal and say, "oh I'm just giving my own personal opinion," when in reality, this so-called personal opinion was delivered as cold, hard, etched-in-stone, universal fact.

Do I have to start every post I make with "In my opinion" to deliver it as my opinion? I think it is pretty much clear that in a discussion everybody just shares their opinion unless it is about something scientifically proven like "The earth revolves around the sun"!

 

[Phineas]

Your back-pedaling and flip-flopping is amusing at best but hardly supports your arguments in any way.

And how is that not a comparison???

See what I mean? You flip-flop constantly, and when you're not flip-flopping you are back-pedaling. Please. Just quit it.

What you're doing is called flip-flopping.
The result is a loss of credibility.

It looks like flip-flopping because some people in this thread are trying to justify their preferences by implying that an "innocent poke on a date" is the same kind of non-con as "tricking people into stocks, filming it, and putting it on a fetish site for other people to buy". Thus, if you don't allow one, you don't allow the other, and that unconditionally, all non-con is bad.

This, of course, is argumentum ad absurdum(sp?) and only serves to deflect the argument. Much like "they're laughing and having a good time, they can't possibly be upset". Well, of course - the crux of my point all along is that one of the reasons they're not upset is because they don't know they're starring in a fetish video - and the "you're laughing, you must enjoy it" can be said about any tickling, never mind the fact that most people laugh when tickled because they don't have any choice.

Look, it's pretty simple; if I could just go trick people off the street into starring in my videos for me, I wouldn't need to acquire model releases that specify exactly what I could do and how I could distribute said footage that are standard practice in the industry.

Non-con is not unconditionally wrong. That's not what the argument is about. The argument is about, specifically, selling/distributing "porn" of people without their consent, and to a lesser extent, lying and tricking strangers into sexually gratifying you. Neither of which I think we should encourage. We get away with it because most people don't sexualize tickling, and we hide behind that. If we were spanking fetishists we couldn't just go walking down the street slapping people on the ass, and it's the exact same thing.

And, as to whether or not it's legal, I point you to the thread I posted about the guy who got arrested for tricking people into letting him sniff their feet by posing as a "therapist". Sounds exactly like what one of our own members here did a while ago, and everyone freaked out on anyone who implied that hey, he might get in trouble for that. There is also the case of the guy who posed as an art student, took pictures of women for a "class project", and then posted them on a pay foot fetish site. One of his "models" did find the site, and she did report him to the police. They did investigate it. I don't know what became of said investigation. So, there is a precedent.

Now, that said, Master Baiter, I do want to thank you for articulating your opinion and answering my question. It may have taken me four askings for you to step up to it, but you still did, and you're the first person who's ever done so. Hat's off to you. (I'm not being sarcastic. I mean that.)

 

[Master Baiter]

Thanks Phineas. I appreciate that.

I've always been a big fan of your posts (since my Nostradamas days here and on AMT) and that hasn't changed because we are on opposite sides of this particular issue.

The element of surprise was the original topic ["do they know it's coming"] before this whole thing devolved into a moral debate about kidnapping, filming, personal privacy, and assorted legal issues.

Thanks for your level-headed insight and candor as well.

 

[jugner]

It is a surprise to some, some have seen others before, but they are all given a safeword before they are tied so they can be released if they start to feel freaked out, that's why some last 20 sec., and some 2-3 min.

 

[jugner]

I jiust remembered, a couple of years ago, an administrator from renfair in caneli came on here and said he was getting angry calls from women who were on the internet. He said a few years back, there were complaints of inproper touching, so the stocks started being recorded. The women (and men) are told they are being recorded, and offered a copy, so they don't think anywthing of any camera, they assume it's administration.

Do they know they're:
getting tickled? Yes
being recorded? Yes
put on the internet? No, that's without consent

 

[rhiannon]

What a surprise....I thought they wouldn't be exactly thrilled being found on the net!