GoForTheLaugh asks: "What do you consider tickling? (Misunderstanding and apology)

[GoForTheLaugh]

GoForTheLaugh asks: "What do you consider tickling? (Misunderstanding and apology)

Last night I had dinner with a fellow TMFer, WorkInProgress, who said I could use his screen name in my post. (How cool to finally meet someone from here!)

Although most of what we discussed had nothing to do with tickling, we did talk about the huge debate over my thread on M/M. WorkInProgress (who is a straight male) gave me (a gay male) good insight, and I told myself that I was going to post something about it this morning.

When I was talking about all the straight males I had seen engaging in tickling, I was referring to pokes, horseplay, and brief tickling. I could not understand the reaction of some folks here--but now I realize that some do not even consider that tickling.

I now understand that there are many who are more interested in the torture aspect of tickling, and that there are lees who enjoy it most when it is torture. Prior to my signing up for this site, I did not consider long torture sessions "real" tickling--just as others do not consider the light, airy play I enjoy tickling. Yes, I have been reading M/M tickling stories on line since 1999, and there were times the torture ones more than piqued my interest--but it was just fiction, as far as I was concerned. I find sweet, sensual tickling stories far more satisfying.

So here is the problem: I was talking about one thing, and others, who flamed me, were talking about something else. Now I feel really foolish. I apologize to anyone who was mislead by my prior posts.

But how could I have possibly known? I am new to the community, and I did make that clear in my second post (the one that started the debate).

Where does that leave me now?

I have had varied tickling experiences, some of which I have discussed here, but nothing for longer than, say, ten seconds, before stopping--and nothing with restraints. Past tickling for me has been horseplay (non-sexual) or light and sensual (as part of sex). It was usually spontatneous.

I guess it boils down to this:

Now that I know what I know, I will have to have a long discussion with a person beforehand to make sure that we are on the same page--and there will definitely have to be a safe word. (I have never even had a need for one before.) As someone who knows and is supportive of people into BDSM but is not into the scene himself, I am not judgmental of torture tickling: It is merely another flavor of something we all love. Yes, it makes me uncomfortable, but I am the one with the problem, not those who engage in it.

I have many mental blocks against inflicting any kind of pain or discomfort on another, but, if that is what a play partner wanted and I heard from his lips that it would give him great pleasure, I could see myself as a sadistic ler. Now there is a part of me that I have never explored, much less thought about. It scares me to some degree. But it is a part of me, nevertheless, and something I should not be so squeamish about.

Yes, in my opinion, all forms of tickling are tickling. Light and airy, torture, and whatever falls in between. Not everyone has to be into everything.

You might disagree--and that is fine. I am curious to know what you think.

 

[TklDuo-Ann]

Personally, I think it took guts for you to step forward and post this...esp. after some of the comments you got in your original thread. That shows a lot of character. We ALL have different likes, dislikes and preferences. The thing that makes us a community is our ability/willingness to accept others for who they are without having to agree about everything. Obviously, some will be more able or willing to show that than others. A good healthy debate can take place without people becoming enemies. Misunderstandings will sometimes occur. But, they don't need to lead to unpleasantness.

People get into tickling in a wide variety of situations and have equally as wide a variety of preferences for how that will go and who it will be with. I think the ability to look at what someone else has stated a liking for and be open enough to consider how we might be able to use that ourselves is a good thing. Even if we don't end up incorporating it into our own play, it helps us to determine just what it is that we like and how far we want to take it. It's all a learning experience.

Ann

 

[steph]

straight f here...

No apology necessary hon. WIP is awesome! Sounds like he gave you some good insight. Don't be so hard on yourself, ok?

XOXO

 

[GoForTheLaugh]

Aw, gosh. You just made me smile big time.

Thanks, TklDuo-Ann and Steph! 🙂

 

[steph]

Oh, it's no problem hon~although you've not been with us long, I always enjoy your posts~I've never got the feeling anything was off when it comes to you (and I'm pretty sharp when it comes to intuition about other people.)

Give Work the word for me, hey? (Oh wait, I just did, huh?) Hee hee~have a great day!

XOXO

 

[WorkInProgress]

Thanks for the nice compliments, my friends. I'm rushing at the moment, but I'll give this thread a few philosophical words of my own probably tomorrow or Friday. I definitely agree that there's nothing to apologize for.

 

[WorkInProgress]

Okay, now I've had a chance to give the thread a close read.

For me, what's interesting is that fetishes are the heightened, sexualized version of what others (that is, those who don't have the fetishes) are more likely to enjoy casually. In the mainstream, people poke each other in the ribs, and they occasionally catch each other for a good rib tickle, but they think of it as casual, spontaneous fun rather than something they spend a lot of time thinking about. And for others, those same elements are highly sexually charged.

Consider what rib-poking is. It's mild sensory surprise. It's a safe entry into the boundaries of the other person's boundary, with an implied mutual consent. Tickling (which I do define a little differently, though certainly with overlap) is at times pretty much the same thing, something done casually and playfully. The key is that those who don't have a fetish can do it, or have it done to them, without it registering a significant memory. For those who do have a fetish, every casual tickle stroke can be a highly memorable event.

But it is interesting that, while the mainstream world would consider fetish tickling bizarre, they do have their milder, more subtle versions of the same thing, and indeed, part of the macho masculinity ritual is inflicting sensory surprise on each other. Hey, when I was in a college dorm, guys were belting each other in the nuts all time. Now there's some m/m S&M for you!

 

[ticklkitten]

I really enjoy this thread as it encourages thought without defensiveness or anger... I thank both of you men from the bottom of my heart for bringing to us. It's SO time for something that brings good to the community.

The point is that tickling is probably something different for most of us. To some it is light and playful and to others it is torturous and hard.... and of course strawberry to everything inbeween.

Thanks guys...

 

[ericr]

Unfortanately some people get way too bent out of shape about this topic. I do not think that an apology is needed. Straight men can tickle other men either casually or intensely.

It is common knowledge that the kind of straight men who will slap another guy on the back (even on the rear end these days) or give another guy an occassional hug will also casually tickle another guy (poke him in the ribs, scratch the sole of his foot at the beach or the like).

It is less common knowledge that some straight men will intensely tickle another guy. This is sometimes a mattter of circumstances where an occasion arises (to get even with a guy, to give him a rough time or the like).
It is sometimes agreed upon (to see who can withstand it the longest, to see what it really feels like, for the emotional realease or the like). This intense tickling is usually kept private since it is seen as child-like or odd for adult behavior. It is also kept private due to reactionary homophobic reactions.

 

[mart]

I never had a problem with your original post - thought you made many valid points. I have neither the experience nor the conviction (nor the interest) to make judgments on what is gay and what is not. I find it interesting to see how you are able to express the things that move you and find I share similar traits - for example, I also cannot persistently do something to someone that makes them feel pain or discomfort.

I am sometimes surprised at the insensitivity displayed by many men in stating their convictions in threads like this - like it really MATTERS what your ideas are about a subject like TICKLING. I mean, get real. If anyone without a fetish like this would read these hardline, macho posts and realise that it is Tickling the guy is talking about, he would have several questions not just about the guy's sexual orientation, but about his basic sanity.

Ultimately it is nothing earth-shattering at stake here, but rather something we would better call entertainment, and when it stops being entertaining and becomes wounding and intolerant, then something is really not quite right anymore.

So, more power to you - and don't feel bad.

 

[GoForTheLaugh]

I am humbled by such incredible posts! You have all given me much to think about. My ideas are not clear yet, but here is what I am working on.

Let me add the reverse perspective:

You all know that I am a gay male, but some of the things I do might make people think I am hetero. (Most people think I am hetero until I out myself.)

---I regularly hold hands with women (especially during long walks)
---I hug female friends and enjoy being with them
---I play cards with married hetero guys
---I have been to baseball games and am in fact wearing a baseball t-shirt right now
---I think women look very sexy in fishnets

Should I check my guys at the door and chase babes in fishnets?

I hope no one said yes. It's about the fishnets, not the person in them.

All the guys I play cards with and women I hug and hold hands with know that I am gay. None of them questions whether I am secretly hetero.

I could write additional paragraphs, but I trust I have made it clear why making any assumptions about someone based on tickling or other habits is absurd. If these assumptions are valid, then I am heterosexual.

I will try to get back on topic. Should we also assume that only men like torture tickling and only women like soft tickling? That would be just as silly, but I can see someone saying that only a real man gets tortured.

When employed sexually, fetishes are about the sex of the person. But taken out of a sexual context, they are about themselves (the actual fetishes) and nothing more.

WorkInProgress wrote very nicely about the casual tickling that mainstream society enjoys but does not think deeply about. That is a good example of non-sexual tickling. Yes, it can be very sexual, but it does not have to be. It can simply be about the fetish itself.

 

[WorkInProgress]

>> ---I hug female friends and enjoy being with them


Now this is common, almost to the point of being universal. Gay men have never been associated with being uncomfortable getting physically affectionate with women. If anything, the conventional wisdom goes, they're more comfortable with it because there's less at stake. On the flip side, most mysogenists I know are straight men, some of whom have booming sex lives.

 

[Oddjob0226]

I don't know that you did anything "wrong" to apologize for. Homosexuality is still a squeamish subject for many, even when overt sexuality isn't part of the scenario, and people react differently. That doesn't mean you can't bring up the subject to begin with. So - whatever that is worth.


(Cash only, please)

 

[ViperGTS]

I can't honestly say that I have tickled another male for several years now. It's (tickling) become such a sexually charged act, they're so closely intertwined, that I would feel just as awkward tickling another man as I would taking out my schlong and slapping him in the face with it. However, when around women, this changes drastically. Though it is still a very sexually charged act, I feel more comfortable doing such a thing around women because I have found that 80% (roughly) will either like it or have no opinion. I'm just so afraid of someone giving me that, "get away from me, homo" look that I subconsciously refuse to touch a man in this manner, ever.

It was mentioned a few posts up that it does happen sometimes as a form of horseplay. I would have to say that in every instance in which I found myself at a disadvantage, I have never used tickling to regain the upper hand. In fact, I cannot think of a situation where I couldn't muscle my way out. Tickling is NOT an option.

Now, don't get me wrong here, I am completely secure in my sexuality. In fact, so is everyone else that I know; I am referred to as the "straightest guy they know" in most cases. However, I am not homophobic. I used to work with a guy a few years back who was terrified of homosexuals, men and women alike. I tried explaining to him that gay men and women are absolutely no different from the rest of us -- hell, alot of times, they're easier to get along with than heteros -- but he would hear none of it. I have several gay friends, and yes, we do horse around, but that's only because the limits between us are well known. There are things I will not allow and things they will not allow.

I'm sorry, but I got distracted and started off on a tangent. My point is hidden in there somewhere. My apologies for going off track, there.

 

[unclebill]

GOFor THELAUGH and Ericr, you are entitled to make your case on behalf of the gay community. However just because a straight male does not care to see m/m tickling, I feel it is wrong for you to label that person a homophobic.

 

[GoForTheLaugh]

GOFor THELAUGH and Ericr, you are entitled to make your case on behalf of the gay community. However just because a straight male does not care to see m/m tickling, I feel it is wrong for you to label that person a homophobic.

I appreciate your honesty, unclebill. Real conversation comes only when people are real.

By the way, Ericr is straight.

Since when was this a case on behalf of the gay community? I state my orientation because I do not believe in deceiving anyone. I don't have to pretend to be straight to be accepted, and I have enough self-respect to know that if I am not respected here, I will leave.

Kindly check every post I have ever made on this board. I have never once labelled anyone who did not care to see M/M tickling homophobic. I have exchanged private messages with and e-mailed about ten people on this site (both sexes and all sexual orientations); some of them have become regular Internet penpals. They can back up what I say about not condemning anyone. In addition, in other threads, I went out of my way to say it was fine for males not to be interested in it M/M.

I fully respect the opinion of members like ViperGTS, and I find nothing homophobic in what he wrote. He is saying that others can do what they wish but, because of what tickling means to him sexually, it is not something he feels comfortable with in the context of two males. That is absolutely fine. Forcing anything on anyone goes against my deepest beliefs. Once I tell people that they must like or try M/M, then they have the right to disrespect my sexual orienation and tell me I can only kiss women. It works both ways.

Many gay people understand that, but, sadly, there are too may who do not--and who will use any manner of deceit with heteros (just as some straight folks will use any manner of deceit with each other.)

Here's the bottom line: If I want people to respect my homosexuality, then I have to respect their heterosexuality. However, I joined this site because it adverstises itself as a place for F/F, M/F, F/M AND M/M. Anyone who does not wish to hear about M/M in any context needs to find a new site. By signing up for this site, a person has agreed to its aims, one of those aims being M/M discussion. I am thus promoting what this site promotes and doing nothing to hurt it.

If the owners suddenly decided that no further M/M discussion was to be allowed, that would be their right. It is their site, not mine. Right now, however, four types of tickling discussion are allowed.

But if straight males never want to "see" M/M because it is so gross, then I guess I am unwelcome at NEST and New York City gatherings--unless, of course, I deceive you by pretending to be heterosexual (the very thing I am against). In that case, the board should have a huge banner: "If you're into M/M, stay far away."

While I am on the subject, let me say that the gay community is as prejudiced as the straight community in this regard. I am frowned on when I hold hands with a woman in Greenwich Village. I wonder what would happen if I tickled a woman on the front steps of the Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual/Transgender Community Center.

Further, two gay men and one bisexual woman know of my tickling interest--the woman and one of the men for a long time--even though they do not share it; I have even sent them links to this board. No one else knows. In most gay circles, I would be a pariah.

The operating principle among too many gays is the same as the operating principle among too many straights: What I like is good; what you like is disgusting.

Many ultra radical gays are the same as many ultra conservatives. Both label the simplest act of affection between two men gay; they would shake hands and agree on M/M tickling. Further, both are full of extremist hate and a sense of sexual orientation superiority: It comes down to homophobia in one case and heterophobia in the other. In my opinion, both camps are sick. Diversity is life.

You don't know me in my real life, of course, but I take the hypocritical gay community to task as often as I do the hypocritical straight community.

I believe it is all right for people of all sexual orientations to do or avoid whatever they wish. If it is between consenting adults and causes no harm, it is good.

Tickling is always sex to some; that's fine. Tickling is sometimes sex and sometimes horseplay to some, myself included; that's fine. Tickling is always horseplay to some; that's fine. That's what this thread is about. Even if you think it is always sexual, you are still going to "see" all four types of horseplay around you, especially in non-ticklephile environments. It does not necessarily mean to others what it means to you.

If two straight guys or two gay guys want to tickle each other, why not? And if they don't, it's fine.

 

[unclebill]

I checked and you do make mention of homophobics in other threads. You seem to spend quite a bit of time in your threads trying to explain yourself. As long as a person is happy it is no ones business what sexual preference they have.

 

[mart]

I know I am straight. How? Because I was pretty revolted by the advances a couple of gay guys made to me when I was in my teens. But the thing is that at least one of these people was a close older friend whom I respected, and still respect, very much.

A human being is much more than a sexual orientation. A human being has thoughts, aims, feelings and suffers and enjoys no matter what. We all feel the need to explain ourselves in order to find understanding from others, especially if we feel they may be of like mind.

That is why it is so odd to think that I should judge someone's preference for gay relationships, a widespread, unthreatening orientation, when I am into ...............tickling!?!

 

[GoForTheLaugh]

unclebill and mart: I appreciate your posts very much.

unclebill: Again, your honesty impresses me greatly.

I am writing about a fetish I am only partially comfortable with. Combine that with the flames I got on my other thread, and all my insecurities are going to come out.

I did a search, and, aside from this thread, I found three instances where I used the word homophobia on this board. At no point (I hope!) did I accuse any poster of being homophobic. All three instances were in my other thread, and I was forcing myself to stay calm and professional when I really wanted to lash out.

I will explain what I meant in each paragraph. If I said something foolish or offensive (always a possibility), I offer my apology. It is also possible that, as you wrote, I spend too much time explaining myself. I am an academic by nature and profession, and I know I often philosophize where I should simply kick back and enjoy things.

*******

1). In this one, I urge people not to use homophobia against heterosexual guys. I was not even defending gays here. How straight guys can accuse other obviously straight guys of being gay is beyond me.

Final word: Many people are against gays, but that is a subject for a different thread. I mention it here because I do not want anyone to be the victim of homophobia. Even if you do not want to accept gay people, please do not turn your homophobia against your straight brothers and sisters simply because they like something you don't.

2). In this one, I question what I have read and try to explain my uneasiness:

I say this because, in a few of the posts above, I wasn't sure whether or not I detected implications of homophobia, so I want to express this as a general principle rather than pointing any fingers.

3). In this one, I accuse gay people of making homophobia worse. In fact, I think many straight people say the same thing:

That being said, yes, there are some gay people who say and do a lot of unfortunate things just as there are straight people who do. There are gay people who assume that all straight folks are bi-curious when only a small number of straight folks are. Some of them make homophobia worse by making straight people uncomfortable.

 

[unclebill]

You seem like a very intellegent man, GoForTheLaugh. Good luck to you.

 

[GoForTheLaugh]

You seem like a very intellegent man, GoForTheLaugh. Good luck to you.

Glad to know someone like you--someone willing to listen--is on this board. 🙂