does tickling have to be sexual?

[drew70]

What I think is being missed here, is that there are other attractions between men and women than sexual ones. Simple affection comes to mind. I can take a woman in my arms, hold her close, kiss her cheek, caress her back, all without getting sexually aroused. I'm not thinking about busting a nut, I'm just thinking about how warm and soft and good she feels in my arms and how much I adore her. Again, this isn't sexual, but it is gender specific, since I don't hold such feelings for other guys.

In the same way, I think tickling even with bondage is something that can be experienced between people, without any sexual overtones or undertones. I personally have been bound and tickled at NEST and at local gatherings here in DC, and while it was exciting as hell, it just wasn't sexual.

 

[ShadowTklr]

All right... how to say all this without stirring up a world of trouble...

I know the party line has always been "There is nothing sexual about tickling at gatherings." And I know for some people, that's probably true. And I know that there are good reasons for proclaiming this, loudly and often: mostly to help potential new attendees feel safe. I know all that.

But for me... if I'm subject to really good tickling in a group setting, like a gathering, I get turned on. Always have. But the message "There is nothing sexual about tickling at gatherings" was strong and everpresent, to the point that I felt that it was wrong for me to be feeling this way. That I was inappropriate. Dirty. Thus, I kept these feelings to myself for several years, until some of us in our local tickling community finally grew close enough as friends to be honest with each other.

In hindsight, it seems obvious to me that I probably wasn't the only one feeling these things. If people can get turned on by watching a tickling clip, or reading a story about tickling, they can probably get turned on by tickling a real live woman. Duh. 😛 Nevertheless, in our greater tickling community, there is a powerful social prohibition against admitting such a thing. The "correct" response is, "No, tickling that beautiful woman in her underwear, watching her tug helplessly at her bonds, until she laughed and screamed and begged for mercy... was just for fun, and completely platonic. Nothing sexual about it at all."

So... I'm not calling anyone a liar for saying tickling at gatherings isn't sexual for them. I'm just hoping we can allow a little honesty. We're all adults, with what many of us would call a "tickling fetish." And we all understand that the presence of sexual energy during a tickling scene doesn't create permission for uninvited touching or other inappropriate/nonconsentual behavior. So if tickling does create sexual feelings for us, can we be honest with ourselves, and with each other, without having to deny or defend it? Can we create an environment where it's okay for a 'ler to say to a 'lee, "That scene was incredibly hot. Thank you!" without making him feel like scum? I honestly believe that doing so will not result in gatherings degenerating into boob-grabbing and public masturbation. 🙄

I guess I just feel like the sexual aspect of tickling is the elephant in the room that no one wants to talk about, and I think if we could just acknowledge it, we'd feel better.

All right... I've said all that as well as I can. Bring on the outcry - don't worry, I'm used to it. 😉

Lindy:
I can't thank you enough for this post. This really put things in perspective for me so that I think I have a real grasp on this whole "Fun" argument. Your explanation carries an honesty that both reaffirms my initial suspicions, and gives me insight into another aspect I hadn't considered.

After reading your post, it's nice to know that I really wasn't missing anything at all. There is no secret "Fun" button that I somehow don't possess, and there aren't any superhuman people here who can actually refrain from FEELING sexual titillation from tickling other adults.

It appears more and more the reality is that tickling adults is sexually titillating (something I said much earlier) however, it does NOT have to lead to sex. So, why the hell can't people just be honest? Is this line just a way of "landing" potential lees? Is it, as you suggested, a way to just make gather(ees) feel less threatened? Do some people think that by denying the sexuality part of tickling that they will make tickling somehow more mainstream? I guess it depends on the individual.
.
.
.
.

 

[ShadowTklr]

Please take this in the spirit in which it is intended. If I offend, I truly apologize in advance. Here it goes:

I suspect that you're getting some of the negative responses because some people take their personal preferences very personally and feel threatened when having them questioned. I don't think you meant it intentionally, but sometimes people get the impression that if people don't think EXACTLY the way certain people do or have the EXACT same opinion, then everyone else is wrong and that individual is right. There are some fourm members who think it's okay to pick apart and insult other's preferences and it will create "attack mode" in people every single time. You might not understand their preferences or opinions or even agree at all. I used to be the same way until I developed an "agree to disagree" policy when it comes to some things that I simply will NEVER agree with. It leaves those with differing POV's with their dignity. Sometimes, that's more important than being right or wrong.

I haven't engaged in bondage play yet except one time light restraint was used and I was the ler. It was a highly charged experience for me, not as much sexual but exciting since it was my very first time tickling at a gathering. I actually got to live out my dream and fantasy by going to this gathering and actually tickling someone-I was like a kid at Christmas time! My lee was very experienced-after the session was over, we talked a lot and hung out while we came back to normal. We had a great time and it had sexually charged potential, but remained fun and platonic. I reiterate that tickling can be fun, platonic, sensual, and sexual all at the same time-why try to separate the pleasures when you can have them all at once? Why concentrate on one aspect when you have so many to experience?

Hi Kis:
I didn't take offense at anything you said. I've come to know that your outlook on things is usually thoughtful, and not intentionally confrontational. I really appreciate it. Both you and BigJim added another layer of perspective to help me understand that I probably wasn't missing the point at all.

My apologies to anyone who thinks I am trying to be deliberately insulting, or dismissive. I'm not. I'm just a Type D personality who tends to want to know how and why, and what for, and yeah but, etc. That's just me. I'm of the opinion that if you have an opinion about anything, you should be able to explain it well enough to those who want more information.

Thanks again

 

[new2sceenbob]

yes

ive been wondering lately if bondage tickling has to be a sexual thing, between gf and bf or something like that, or could it be a casual fun thing between friends? personally, i think it should be a fun thing, but i kno there are lots of ppl who have other opinions. what do you think?

Yes, for me it has to be sexual! I can't help how I feel about it!

Sincerely,
Bob

 

[lk70]

After reading your post, it's nice to know that I really wasn't missing anything at all. There is no secret "Fun" button that I somehow don't possess, and there aren't any superhuman people here who can actually refrain from FEELING sexual titillation from tickling other adults.

It appears more and more the reality is that tickling adults is sexually titillating (something I said much earlier) however, it does NOT have to lead to sex. So, why the hell can't people just be honest? Is this line just a way of "landing" potential lees? Is it, as you suggested, a way to just make gather(ees) feel less threatened? Do some people think that by denying the sexuality part of tickling that they will make tickling somehow more mainstream? I guess it depends on the individual.
. .
.
.

Lindy stated that she became aroused at gatherings. She didn't state that everyone does.

Human beings are really complex creatures and I'm flabbergasted that some people feel the need to compartmentalize everyone. Not everyone reacts the same way to anything. Hell, there are times when the same person will react differently to the same stimulus.

Having been at the bottom of a gang tickle on more than one occasion, I can honestly say that it was fun and exciting. Sexual? I honestly don't think so. If I may get a little crude here- I was dripping wet after it, but only from sweat- get my drift? Some of the gentlemen I've played with aren't people I was attracted to, no sexual chemistry present at all and in those cases, there is just no sexual charge from the play, bondage or not.

The day could easily come that I will get sexually aroused during a group tickle, or at a gathering, and I can assure you I won't deny it. Not my style. I can think of 5 or 6 lers right now who if they were all present would almost certainly result in some arousal on my part.

It bears repeating- humans are complex creatures and I really really wish people would stop trying to make absolute statements that are true for everyone. It doesn't work. Just stop it.

 

[ViperGTS]

Well, THIS is an original conversation!

Let's recap, and put a few things in order. Irish and I have had this conversation numerous times.

Define "sexual." Do you mean that sexual acts are going on? Or do you mean that people are getting lustful emotions, and raging hard-ons during tickling?

As Irish and I have spoken about before, when I am with her, and we start playing, be it playful pokes and prods around the house, or with her strapped to the bed for a couple hours, I want her quite badly. So yes, that IS quite sexual. She's smokin' hot, we both have a thing for tickling, so two and two equals sex.

Let's say I was out with friends. One of my friends happens to be a particularly attractive female who's just about as playful as I am. For whatever reason, she ticks me off or says something that makes me want to attack her. As my other friends cheer me on, I tickle her senseless. Do I become aroused? No. Is this in anyway sexually fueled? No. It's a public setting, and we're just having fun. Nothing more.

Let's say, same woman, different situation. We're at her place or my place, for whatever reason...she had to pick something up from home, or I forgot my cell phone, or some shit like that. Again, something is done or said that sparks a playful tickle fight. After I've had her begging for mercy for a couple seconds, will I be sexually aroused? Maybe. I might be "up," so to speak. but does that mean I want sex? Negatory. All that means is that I have associated being alone with an attractive woman and tickling with the physical act of sex (read: my relationship with IrishGirl). In my mind, simply the htought of sex is entirely innapropriate, and it never becomes more than tickling.

I see many people discussing the sexual side of gatherings. Let me break this down for you folks, since some of you do not seem to get it. Public play is not sexual in nature. However, most gatherings are held at a hotel or someone's large house, where there are rooms to spare; privacy. In the back of people's minds (those who find tickling to be sexual), they know that there's a chance of getting laid, and it's that simple. So no, gatherings are not sexual. but the word "gathering" is defined as the public meeting of those who are into tickling as a fetish or passtime, not what goes on when two (sometimes more) people separate from that gathering and go off to find nookies.

Whew. Did I miss anything? Help me fill in the holes here, folks.

 

[booberrytickle]

As a male 'ler in a long-term relationship with a woman who is not ticklish, I thought I would give my thoughts from that point of view. Tickling is a part of my life and takes many forms...it has been sexual and certainly has the capacity to be utilized as foreplay, etc. At this point, I seek out this forum to fulfill a part of my life that is important, but does not override the other aspects of my relationship. That's just my personal choice and situtation. If 'lers and 'lees are honest with each other, mature about things and respect limits and personal feelings, I see no reason why they can't mutually fulfill each other's needs for tickling without a sexual context.

I have tickled friends in public or (even private) non-sexual environments...sometimes they know that I'm "into it", sometimes not. Is it fun...you bet. Do I always get turned on? No. It all depends. I do admit that there is often a subtle "sexual" component in the sense that, under the right circumstances, I get some "titillation" (as others have put it), but that doesn't mean that it has to be acted upon. I think the distinction is that tickling can be sexual in the right context...sort of like a massage. Between partners, it can lead to something sexual...with friends or even a professional, it's a totally different thing. It's all about context and personal choice. I have no illusions that tickling for me can be sexual, but I also think that tickling can be fun and non-sexual, while still fulfilling my interest in tickling and need to for it. My particular tickling needs can be fulfilled without sex attached to it. In other words, the difference is not whether tickling can be "sexual"...to some extent any touching can be intimate and either overtly or covertly sexual. The difference is whether you feel that it must always lead to sex (equivalent, for example, to genital or other sexual touching). Personally, I don't see it that way, but I can see how others could feel differently (and I am very tolerant of other opinions). Like many things of an intimate nature, it depends on the individual and the context. Anyway, those are my thoughts.

 

[BigJim]

All right... how to say all this without stirring up a world of trouble...

I know the party line has always been "There is nothing sexual about tickling at gatherings." And I know for some people, that's probably true. And I know that there are good reasons for proclaiming this, loudly and often: mostly to help potential new attendees feel safe. I know all that.

But for me... if I'm subject to really good tickling in a group setting, like a gathering, I get turned on. Always have. But the message "There is nothing sexual about tickling at gatherings" was strong and everpresent, to the point that I felt that it was wrong for me to be feeling this way. That I was inappropriate. Dirty. Thus, I kept these feelings to myself for several years, until some of us in our local tickling community finally grew close enough as friends to be honest with each other.

Well for what it's worth both Mimi and myself have said that the physical reaction to being tickled or tickling a lee is arousal. Obviously tickling is inherantly sexual to us. Being that way, but enjoying the physical act with someone who is never going to be anything but a pfriend doesn't require schizophrenia or MPD, it just requires a mind that can seperate two concepts.

It's okay to tickle a friend and enjoy a physical sexual response (getting turned on IOW). That doesn't make the situation a sexual one. Hell, I'll be honest; when my female cousin gave me some backchat in an attempt to wind me up, I tickled her and there was a physical reaction to that. The idea of shagging her makes me want to throw up! Yeesh... The physical reaction is probably unavoidable.

I think what this comes down to is a fear and a feeling of shame about how our emotions and sexual feelings course through us. Because a Christianised society has taught us that anything that pitches a trouser tent or gives you that "funny feeling" is sexual and anything outside of a partnership or marriage is evil, bad wicked and we'll burn in hell for it. Drew70 of course (sorry to pick on you Drew - no offence intended) is both a Christian and someone who has no trouble seperating the two things. He regularly attends gatherings without his wife, who I've seen him say is not interested at all.

Learning to deal with that is the thing I think. It's also possible that we're defining "sexual" in different terms. A platonic 1-on-1 or gathering tickle doesn't mean you don't get physically turned on, it just means that you know sexual contact is not on the cards, never was and never will be and that the person you're playing with is a mate, not a mate.

 

[BigJim]

What I think is being missed here, is that there are other attractions between men and women than sexual ones. Simple affection comes to mind. I can take a woman in my arms, hold her close, kiss her cheek, caress her back, all without getting sexually aroused. I'm not thinking about busting a nut, I'm just thinking about how warm and soft and good she feels in my arms and how much I adore her. Again, this isn't sexual, but it is gender specific, since I don't hold such feelings for other guys.

In the same way, I think tickling even with bondage is something that can be experienced between people, without any sexual overtones or undertones. I personally have been bound and tickled at NEST and at local gatherings here in DC, and while it was exciting as hell, it just wasn't sexual.

Ah, just read this post now. Well said that man!

 

[Mimi]

I was going to type yet another long winded reply to try and explain my point of view again, but lk70 and Viper truly did such a good job with making the point I was about to attempt again, so it would only take up space.

In short: When tickling or being tickled by a partner I am intimate with, yes, it is sexual. When tickling among adult friends, even WITH bondage, no, it does not HAVE to be sexual. I may become aroused, but that is only my bodies natural reaction to the stimulation, and my mind does not follow suit. I do not get any carnal thoughts or desires for the people I am engaged in tickling with. I certainly would not be offended if anyone I was engaged in play with became aroused....I've had many a male lee pitch a tent while I was tickling them....but again I know it's a bodies natural reaction to the stimulation and nothing more is going to come of it. I have no sexual desire for the lee I am tickling, and he has none for me. It's just a hot session. Things can be stimulating and arousing without being completely of a sexual nature. For some reason so many people seem to think it needs to completely be black or white, when it's mostly a very grey area, with many different shades to fit each individual within the scope. I think that is the key factor everyone needs to recognize here. It's different for each and every one of us, and no blanket generalization is going to work here. We just all need to accept the varied degrees of opinions and personal experiences on this matter.

And I STILL wound up typing far more than I intended! You all better stop making me run my mouth, or you'll be sorry!! 😛

Mimi

 

[ShadowTklr]

Yep. I think everyone who has posted is right. I'm probably doing more harm than good trying to define this point of view, bearing in mind that it really is MY perspective and doesn't necessarily mean that it belongs to everyone here.

Mimi, Viper, lk70, and everyone else; I fully understand your POV, and this has been an interesting conversation for me. I hope no one feels that I've been overbearing, its just that this is one of those really interesting topics that I haven't taken part in before, even though you guys have probably talked it to death.

I'll make room now by not posting anymore questions. Thanks for those people who really helped me understand the variety to which you all view tickling.
🙂

 

[fearsometickler]

For me tickling is very erotic matter and it's important part of my intime life, but I can't say tickling can't be only a good fun between friends

 

[LindyHopper]

Thank you to everyone for your responses! Especially you, simulated - your positive reaction is very important to me.

Here's my follow-up (and apologies in advance to the people I will inevitably offend - not getting smacked for my previous post has made me bold 😀):

There seems to be a prevalent opinion on this thread that if no one got naked or had an orgasm, then nothing sexual happened. To me, this idea misses a whole lot of thinking and acting that falls short of a visible sexual act. If ticklingfeet4fu wants to assert that at his gatherings, "the chances are you not going to be aroused for the entire weekend," I am forced to conclude that he's probably missing something, for at least some of his attendees. My own experience has demonstrated to me that you may not see anything sexual going on, but you also can't see inside people's heads to know how they're reacting.

I also wonder sometimes about the vehemence with which some of us deny anything sexual about our tickling. Statements like, "my body was aroused, but my mind wasn't," or "just because a sexual response happened, doesn't mean the situation was sexual," sound, to my ears [insert disclaimer about not being a mind reader here 😉], like trying to avoid legitimizing those feelings. There's also the repeated insistence that, "just because you're aroused, that doesn't mean you want to act on it." To me, that's just obvious common sense. But I still believe that the knowledge that you're never going to "consummate" the tickling act with your 'lee or 'ler doesn't really have a bearing on the feelings themselves. If you're turned on, you're turned on, whether or not you're planning to get laid, or whether you have any sexual desire whatsoever for the person you're playing with.

Once again, I know that everyone reacts differently, and that broad generalizations are unhelpful. But I am in favor of acknowledging whatever it is that you do feel, and accepting it, rather than trying to deny it or explain it away. I have the sneaking suspicion that we sometimes call our tickling "playful" rather than "sexual" because, for various reasons, we feel that we need to. I think, as BigJim commented, we're dealing with a lot of cultural training that tells us that sexual thoughts, especially outside of a marriage, are evil. Thus, we may feel compelled to deny them, even if they're essentially harmless. We're all smart enough to know that we don't have to act on sexual feelings, so why should the feelings themselves scare us?

I guess all I'm saying is that I'm a big fan of 1) introspection, and 2) honesty. I hope everyone uses the freedom to understand what they actually feel, and can be straightforward in talking about it. 🙂

 

[BigJim]

What it comes down to Lindy is what different people describe as a sexual situation. Some people would describe visiting the beach as a sexual situation under your definitions, given the amount of flesh on display.

I think so long as everyone is aware of all implications, nothing can be laid at anyone's door.

 

[Mimi]

Let me try wording it this way:

I DO acknowledge I get aroused when tickled. But if nothing sexual in nature results from that arousal, then for ME, it is not sexual. In order for me to define it as sexual, I would need to follow it up with intimate stimulation based on sexual gratification. That does not happen. So even though I may physically become a little titillated by the tickling it's still only fun and games for me unless it becomes something more overtly sexual.

I get turned on by a lot of things: dancing my ass off at the club to some really hot music.....certain colognes men wear.....a good massage.....the sight of a killer plump ass on a cute woman.....the sound of a man rolling his R's.....watching my man get all sweaty and pumped in a wrestling match....etc. But unless any of these lead to or result an act of actual sexual gratification, I simply can not define them as sexual for me personally.

And Lindy, I would never berate you for expressing your opinion, no matter how severely it may differ from my own. I have far too much respect for you and your view on many things to ever take issue with a view you've expressed. (unless, of course, you said something like closed minded people may have it right after all. Then I might have to spank you. 😉 )

Mimi

 

[AffectionateDan]

(unless, of course, you said something like closed minded people may have it right after all. Then I might have to spank you. 😉 )

Are there clips?

 

[wendynpeter]

...In fact, it's a very FAMILY type atmosphere...

Oh, for cryin' out loud, who are you kidding here??? Apparently, yourself ... or .. maybe not, read on....

 

[wendynpeter]

Let me try wording it this way:

I DO acknowledge I get aroused when tickled.

Well, THAT's better ... This topic is definitely the very definition of conversational hell. It's clear to me anyway that you guys have no idea what makes you tick. Talk about deep, deep confusion.

To say that it's not sexual unless you have sex ... I mean, oh well... forget it. Believe what you want. There's no point in continuing this nonsense. I'm out.

 

[Mimi]

On the contrary I have a very good grasp of what makes me tick. I think you only want to believe otherwise since my views don't mesh with yours, and therefore I must be whacked. 🙄

 

[AffectionateDan]

On the contrary I have a very good grasp of what makes me tick. I think you only want to believe otherwise since my views don't mesh with yours, and therefore I must be whacked. 🙄

You oughta be flattered, Meems... most places, ya gotta pay extra for that. 😉

 

[LindyHopper]

[in reply to simulated] Again, I offer you the same idea, I challenge you to come here to our gathering and find out if it is sexual or not. Since it seems you have your own definition of sexuality, then come here to our gathering in October and find out for yourself. You might find out that with as many people who are here and with as much public tickling that goes on unless you are on Viagra the chances are you not going to be aroused for the entire weekend. Nobody's that good.

Hmm... then I dare say that simulated might have more fun at our gatherings than he would at yours...

I think so long as everyone is aware of all implications, nothing can be laid at anyone's door.

Agreed. I just sometimes see what looks suspiciously like people changing their definition of "sexual" specfically to avoid the implications of what it might mean. That's when I worry.

And Lindy, I would never berate you for expressing your opinion, no matter how severely it may differ from my own. I have far too much respect for you and your view on many things to ever take issue with a view you've expressed. (unless, of course, you said something like closed minded people may have it right after all. Then I might have to spank you. 😉 )

Thank you, Mimi! (or if you prefer! 😀 ). Your respect is worth major points in my book! 🙂

Are there clips?

The prerequisite was that I say something like, "closed minded people may have it right after all." So don't hold your breath, man!

To say that it's not sexual unless you have sex ... I mean, oh well... forget it. Believe what you want. There's no point in continuing this nonsense. I'm out.

And good freakin' riddance to you! 😛 If we ignore your posts, then we see the very picture of intelligent conversation among differing points of view.

I know we've done this topic like a million times before, but I do feel that new ground has been covered this time around. Hugs and congrats to all concerned!

 

[BigJim]

Agreed. I just sometimes see what looks suspiciously like people changing their definition of "sexual" specfically to avoid the implications of what it might mean. That's when I worry.

Well my definition has always been the same, mostly because I divorce myself from the guilt and fear issues that a "normal" social conditioning inflicts on the soul.

I consider an experience "sexual" if there is an undercurrent of sexual energy that both participants detect and relish for what it is. That doesn't include enjoying tickling, an activity which under the right circumstances would make darn good foreplay, with the clear understanding that no sexual possibilities exist between us.

I have spent a couple of days with a girl in a hotel room (well more than one girl actually), tickling her senseless, in bondage AND including the technique of "lickling" (sucking the toes and licking between them or on the bare soles to make it tickle). My relationship with that girl is, in all other respects, identical to the conventional view of friendship. There is no undercurrent of sexual tension and there is a very palpable joshing and piss-taking atmosphere that is far more identifiable with two mates than with two people who might end up as lovers. To me that makes the situation "non-sexual" even though I perform an act on her (sucking her toes) that obviously would look very sexual and gives me the same physical reaction I would get if I did it to a lover.

 

[wendynpeter]

On the contrary I have a very good grasp of what makes me tick. I think you only want to believe otherwise since my views don't mesh with yours, and therefore I must be whacked. 🙄

Mimi, I know I said I wasn't going to post to this thread anymore, but I do apologize for being so shitty in my last posts. It is just beyond me how someone can say they are aroused by being tickled, and still maintain that adult bondage/tickling isn't sexual, and then liken the whole thing to a family event. It just makes no sense. But whatever, it doesn't need to make sense to me. Peace.

 

[simulated]

Hmm... then I dare say that simulated might have more fun at our gatherings than he would at yours...

Edit for response:

Originally Posted by ticklingfeet4fu
Again, I offer you the same idea, I challenge you to come here to our gathering and find out if it is sexual or not. Since it seems you have your own definition of sexuality, then come here to our gathering in October and find out for yourself. You might find out that with as many people who are here and with as much public tickling that goes on unless you are on Viagra the chances are you not going to be aroused for the entire weekend. Nobody's that good.

You assume that I've never been to a gathering 😉

 

[Bagelfather]

In defense of Lindy and our gatherings

You are assuming everyone acts the same. Let me ask you something. Is it your goal to always be right? I know what makes me tick. If I am tickling Sadira then I am sexually charged. If I am tickling anyone else ( and I have tickled the likes of Lady Sunset, ticklkitten, lk70 ,ticklejen, Irishgirl5 ,Steph and bellystrokes to name a few ) and everyone knows how beautiful all these ladies are and yet I DO NOT get sexually charged. I know that Sadira has been tickled by these ladies and many good-looking guys and it does not charge her. But I get her charged. So do me a favor, don't tell me what makes me tick. Because all you did was tick me off.

You assume that I've never been to a gathering 😉I didn't assume anything. I am telling you what goes on at our gatherings. We deal with things in a classy manner.

As far as you Lindy: Maybe everyone would have a better time at your gatherings. But then again, the last thing I want to do is to change the sheets after everyone has left because because twelve couples were in the same bed. So if that is what you consider a better time then you are right. Your parties are more fun. But I will stick with the classy people who don't feel the need to have sex to have a good time.

Okay I have to say that this personal attack on Lindy makes me ill. The gatherings are not exclusively hers, they are done by multiple people. She has helped organize some of them and is currently helping organize the upcoming gathering.

It is because of unfounded rumors, hyperbole, and inuendo that changed a "public" gathering into a "private" one which is why I did NOT attend the last beach house gathering. When I found out that Lindy was 'Banned' I was beyond p'ssed off! She is my friend and I will stand by her as long as she is my friend and is being treated in a wrongful fashion. How that gathering was run was in an intolerant and childlike manner.

Also I would like to point out that since you have NEVER been to a gathering with her you have ABSOLUTELY no right to say what is classy and what is not classy about our events when she is attending. I hate to tell you this but there have been sexual energy at events LONG before she entered the scene. There is nothing wrong with having a gathering where you feel a need to supress or not have sexual energy but where do you get off making a personal attack on a very lovely, intelligent, funny, and wonderful individual who does?

I hate to tell you this buddy but I got aroused MANY times at your gathering with various scenes going on. Did I act on it, did I fondle people, did I run off and have sex with someone? NO... I am able to keep that part of me under check when needed. I have a good amount of self control in that area. I could feel the sexual energy in several scenes. That does NOT mean sexual activity takes place but people were aroused to one level or another. Not everyone was but there were some people who were. Did any of them do anything inappropriate? NO. Were all the scenes sexual, no. Was EVERYONE sexually charged, probably not. I didn't talk about it because there was no need too, until now.

This woman has helped me through a lot of difficult times and I am not going to stand by and let you degrade her based on rumors or inuendo that the gods and goddesses from up whisper in someone's little ear.

I would like to remind you of what happened at a gathering where I went home at 6am because of things that occured that were sexual, and NON consentual since I was in the room sleeping at the time and was not made aware that this would take place. I hope someone changed the sheets that morning because it was not me dude, I was GONE. Is this a gathering that you call classy? I don't know, you tell me, Lindy was not there but some other people were involved... and I was not ready for that, and it freaked me out.

This is why I don't do sexal scenes or get sexal unless that is the consent of the group. This is why I do NOT bottom (be a lee) unless I am with someone who I am intimate with, and whom I care and trust very much. I have been lee to a few of the ladies here for brief times but there is only one lady, my current lover, who I truly enjoy being that with her, and vice versa. I can tell you that is sexual for both of us.

HOW DARE people go on and make an attack on Lindy or anyone who enjoys sexual play at gatherings when it is STATED and checked with all attendees that this is okay at the time this is initiated. If you want to pretend that NO ONE has sexual energy or is turned on in anyway then go on and live your fantasy life. You can speak for yourself, you can speak for your lady but you cannot speak for the rest of us. I for one was turned on several times, that invalidates your theory right there buddy.

HOW DARE those of you on your high and mighty moral horse make attacks to her face or behind her back when many of your guilty of doing MUCH worse and not admitting to it. She is just the most open and vocal one in our local community so you think of her as having less class, slutty, or worse. You have no idea what kind of person she is, and you have no right to attack her in this fashion.

SHE at least talks to her partner and is HONEST about what she does. She does NOT LIE to her partner about what goes on, or hides things. NOT like the people who are spreading rumors and making personal attacks. Anything she does is consentual with her partner, and with those around her.

Apparently I am attending the wrong types of gatherings, and I need to stay close to home with the people I care about, and who are honest with me. I know who the classy people are, and they are the people who attend the gatherings that I help host. We have class in spades and DON'T you forget it!

I have never been so angry about a post before.