Okay, a few points:
Firstly, Bator... I do apologize if you were blanket included in something where I implied that I thought your comment in particular was narrow-minded. I would have to read them again to be sure, but I was honestly just looking for people who posted a variety of seemingly "negative" comments which I did not feel were "wrong" per se. I did use the word "may" when it came to my own personal disagreement, because I did not necessarily think them ALL narrow-minded. It was my intention to contrast a bulk group of statements in a very general sense to make a point regarding what irritated me. I was not wanting to argue with you specifically, I was merely highlighting your comment because you chose words that did not point fingers, which I appreciate. I'm sorry you completely missed this.
Also, DAJT... while I am impressed by your knowledge and awareness of gender identification issues, I would like to point out that this is technically not directly related. Gender identity is independent of sexual preference. People who identify as men, women, or neither can be found all along the spectrum of what they call gay/straight. In this case, there was little ambiguity... the OP seems to identify as male, and this was never called into question.
I did use similar terms though, because the term "identify" is also very commonly used to refer to how people view their sexual preference. For example, I "identify" as bisexual. That means I call myself this. While tickling is not even remotely always sexual for me, I can be turned on being tickled by or tickling a woman as well as a man, and I am attracted to women as well as men outside of this fetish. I have also been tickled by family members, and that was not even remotely sexual for me, because I am not attracted to the person doing it. See the difference?
Here, the OP was saying he was not interested in sex with men, but was interested in tickling with them. What he did not specify either way was whether being tickled by men was a turn-on, or just something he craved in a sensory way. Therefore, it was uncalled-for, in my opinion, to say that he, for a FACT, was actually gay and accuse him of posting for false reasons. That IS calling a person a liar, no matter how you color it later. Now, had they said, "Dude, have you ever considered the fact you might be gay/bisexual?" would have been FINE. (That's the other thing... a woman who tickles women is clearly able to be straight or bi, but a guy who tickles men is ONLY able to be gay it would seem, according to the language used by many here.)
Which brings me to Sodahead's post... which I will simply say I think is a very clear and interesting example of how people perceive the sexuality of men versus women. Society is, in fact, more accepting of physical contact between women than between men. I simply believe that something like sexual preference is far more personal than that, and just because there are men out there who defy the social and/or genetic programming and crave the same physical contact platonically with men that "straight" women enjoy with other women, that this does not give anybody outside the experience the right to call it "gay" or not. We can't know. We can ASK, but we cannot TELL.
I hope this clarifies things.