Does this sound like border line prostitution?

[mass1926]

-------------

 

[BlackestLily]

I don't see it as prostitution.

If it makes you morally uncomfortable (I'm assuming it does if you're questioning intentions and posing this question), then I'd say you made the right decision by saying no.

But I think if you're asking if there would be trouble from the police, I seriously doubt it unless you actually did pay for sexual acts. Arousal isn't cause for fines or prison, but paying someone who services people sexually for a living can be cause for those things. Things will only go as far as both consenting adults allow, and if you don't tickle her junk, then...well...that's that.

 

[mass1926]

-----

 

[Deadsea7777]

Prostitution has at least two accepted meanings:

Activity in which a person admits sexual contacts in exchange for money.

Degradation, generally because of interest: prostitution of ideas in exchange for power.

Then you need to define a sexual contact. If tickling means sexual contact for you then it is for you, if it does not mean sexual contact for her, then it does not mean sexual contact for her. Therefore, it would be prostitution for you but not for her.

If there is offering sexual intercourse for pay, in the USA that may be against the law.

The second type of prostitution is commonplace in all political activities. And far more dangerous for humanity than the women/men renting their bodies for pleasure of others.

I think the girl has a healthy enterprise spirit, you want to tickle her, and enjoy the squirm of her body…they pay for it. You do not want to pay for it, then there is no tickling. End of story.

 

[ChicagoDavid]

I'm not sure why I'm posting on this, as it's been pretty beaten to death.

1. Prostitution is a legal term. Very likely this is not prostitution.

2. People have to decide whether they think it is morally wrong to pay to play. Personally, I think people should do whatever they want, so long as no one is harmed. And for me, morally, that's the same, whether it's paying for sex, or tickling. In my view, either one is okay morally, but I can see how someone who thinks that one is wrong morally would see the other in the same way.

3. For most people, it's more fun to play with someone who plays because they want to, not because it's a source of $. Still, the ability to look up a bio and go tickle that person creates some opportunities for fun that otherwise would not be there.

4. Yes, in response to one posting, I think that the woman who won't see a guy because he does not buy her things or take her to expensive restaurants is no less a prostitute than someone who demands cash. In a legal sense, the former likely is not prostitution, but morally, I see no difference at all.

5. Personally, I'd be hurt if a buddy said, "I'm charging you now." I'd pay to tickle someone else before I'd pay that person. I think that original poster of this thread probably had similar hurt feelings, and I don't blame him!

 

[rhiannon]

4. Yes, in response to one posting, I think that the woman who won't see a guy because he does not buy her things or take her to expensive restaurants is no less a prostitute than someone who demands cash. In a legal sense, the former likely is not prostitution, but morally, I see no difference at all.

5. Personally, I'd be hurt if a buddy said, "I'm charging you now." I'd pay to tickle someone else before I'd pay that person. I think that original poster of this thread probably had similar hurt feelings, and I don't blame him!

Very wisely said!

 

[maniactickler]

Im a supporter of pay to play. been doing it for the past 5 years.

 

[Gadilici]

Maniac, you using escorts, or do you place ads specifically for pay to tickle?

Christopher

 

[maniactickler]

Maniac, you using escorts, or do you place ads specifically for pay to tickle?

Christopher

I find them off a female wrestling site.