M/M tickling for heteros?

[Ticklerguy4u]

To put it simply, a gender is only gay when they want the same gender to be their lover. Personality traits have nothing to do with sexual preference. Unfortunately, not everyone wants to believe that. It's easier to lump a whole colony then get to know the individual.

 

[OBleedingMe]

I'll try to restate my opinion in a simpler form.

1.
- A man enjoys anal sex with women. He fantasizes about having anal intercourse with women. This is arousal between opposite sexes. This is heterosexual behavior.

- A man enjoys anal sex with men. He fantasizes about anal intercourse with men. This is arousal between the same sex. This is homosexual behavior.

- A man has anal sex with a woman, but secretly fantasizes the woman he is having sexual relations with is male. These are repressed homosexual tendencies.

2.
- A man enjoys strap-on roleplay with a woman. He fantasizes about being dominated by a woman with a strap-on. This is attraction between the opposite sex. This is heterosexual behavior.

- A man enjoys strap-on roleplay with a woman. He secretly fantasizes about being dominated by a man instead of a woman. These are repressed homosexual tendencies.

3.
- A man is aroused by tickling or being tickled by another man. He fantasizes about the scenario. He masturbates to the scenario. The scenario of m/m tickling gives him an erection. This is arousal between the same sex. This IS homosexual behavior. It does not mean that the man in question enjoys other homosexual activities (anal play, mutual masturbation, etc.). However, to refute that this activity is homosexual behavior is to be in denial.

- A man is aroused by tickling or being tickled by another man. He secretly fantasizes about tickling women when engaging in this activity. These are repressed heterosexual tendencies. My advice to these men? Unless you're in a jail cell somewhere, scrape some cash together, and go to places like the Den of Inquity in NY where you can live out your actual fantasies.

To Battousai:

You are completely wrong. Not everyone enjoys male anal penetration. For me (and many others), it's considered a humiliating, traumatic, and disgusting action. I would not enjoy any physical sensations from it because I find the action in and of itself wrong. This is somewhat similar to women who have orgasms during rape. Just because something feels good doesn't mean the person desires it.

Now, this doesn't mean that you or anyone else cannot engage in male anal play. You are free to do what you like, but do not label others (aren't you against labeling?) as homophobic because they don't like the idea of male anal play. That's like me calling a woman a tickle-a-phobic or calling her intolerent because the idea of tying her down and tickling her doesn't turn her on.

You, like most of us in this forum, have a sexual deviance (I myself have several). You have to accept that this deviance is NOT accepted by the vast majority of society and that labeling people who aren't turned on by your deviance will only alienate you. You have to accept that there isn't some sort of vast anti-male anal play conspiracy out there preventing millions of men from acting on their urges. There just simply aren't that many men who enjoy it. Yeah, that sucks for you, but you're in the same boat as many other deviances, and with the advent of the internet, communities for nearly every sexual deviance has sprung up. You're not alone.

To Cosmo:

Power Play, Roleplaying, and Control Play do NOT factor into heterosexual or homosexual behavior. Only the sex of the participants factor into it. If you are a man and are sexually aroused by dominating other men, it's homosexual behavior. If you are a man and are sexually aroused by dominating women, it's heterosexual behavior. You see, the activity or action doesn't matter. It matters what arouses you - accomplishing this activity with the opposite sex or the same sex. It's that simple.

 

[Battousai]

Let me apologise. I agree with what you've said and maybe I did come off as a bit pompous.

However, I said 'anyone can enjoy it' not 'everyone does enjoy it'. I also said 'a lot of men', not 'all men'. I was trying to keep things unspecific, I know that one thing doesn't work for everyone.

Actually, looking back, I can see how my sentences could be taken the wrong way. What I should have said was 'anyone, no matter their gender or sexual alignment, can enjoy etc etc'.

Anyway, sorry again if I didn't put it into words well.

 

[Battousai]

Oh, and in addition to the above, my 'homophobic' comment was directed <i>only</i> at the people who claim that any guy wanting to have anal sex is gay.

 

[tickler_n_black]

was directed <i>only</i> at the people who claim that any guy wanting to have anal sex is gay.

If he's wanting to have anal with another man, he IS "being gay."
That's so simple.
If it's with a woman, it's heterosexual.
How hard is this to understand? 🙂
Are you really saying that a man wanting to have anal with another man is somehow not showing gay tendencies? How can you even try and say that?

 

[tickler_n_black]

I'll try to restate my opinion in a simpler form.

1.
- A man enjoys anal sex with women. He fantasizes about having anal intercourse with women. This is arousal between opposite sexes. This is heterosexual behavior.

- A man enjoys anal sex with men. He fantasizes about anal intercourse with men. This is arousal between the same sex. This is homosexual behavior.

- A man has anal sex with a woman, but secretly fantasizes the woman he is having sexual relations with is male. These are repressed homosexual tendencies.

2.
- A man enjoys strap-on roleplay with a woman. He fantasizes about being dominated by a woman with a strap-on. This is attraction between the opposite sex. This is heterosexual behavior.

- A man enjoys strap-on roleplay with a woman. He secretly fantasizes about being dominated by a man instead of a woman. These are repressed homosexual tendencies.

3.
- A man is aroused by tickling or being tickled by another man. He fantasizes about the scenario. He masturbates to the scenario. The scenario of m/m tickling gives him an erection. This is arousal between the same sex. This IS homosexual behavior. It does not mean that the man in question enjoys other homosexual activities (anal play, mutual masturbation, etc.). However, to refute that this activity is homosexual behavior is to be in denial.

- A man is aroused by tickling or being tickled by another man. He secretly fantasizes about tickling women when engaging in this activity. These are repressed heterosexual tendencies. My advice to these men? Unless you're in a jail cell somewhere, scrape some cash together, and go to places like the Den of Inquity in NY where you can live out your actual fantasies.

To Battousai:

You are completely wrong. Not everyone enjoys male anal penetration. For me (and many others), it's considered a humiliating, traumatic, and disgusting action. I would not any enjoy physical sensations from it because I find the action in and of itself wrong. This is somewhat similar to women who have orgasms during rape. Just because something feels good doesn't mean the person desires it.

Now, this doesn't mean that you or anyone else cannot engage in male anal play. You are free to do what you like, but do not label others (aren't you against labeling?) as homophobic because they don't like the idea of male anal play. That's like me calling a woman a tickle-a-phobic or calling her intolerent because the idea of tying her down and tickling her doesn't turn her on.

You, like most of us in this forum, have a sexual deviance (I myself have several). You have to accept that this deviance is NOT accepted by the vast majority of society and that labeling people who aren't turned on by your deviance will only alienate you. You have to accept that there isn't some sort of vast anti-male anal play conspiracy out there preventing millions of men from acting on their urges. There just simply aren't that many men who enjoy it. Yeah, that sucks for you, but you're in the same boat as many other deviances, and with the advent of the internet, communities for nearly every sexual deviance has sprung up. You're not alone.

To Cosmo:

Power Play, Roleplaying, and Control Play do NOT factor into heterosexual or homosexual behavior. Only the sex of the participants factor into it. If you are a man and are sexually aroused by dominating other men, it's homosexual behavior. If you are a man and are sexually aroused by dominating women, it's heterosexual behavior. You see, the activity or action doesn't matter. It matters what arouses you - accomplishing this acitivity with the opposite sex or the same sex. It's that simple.

OBleedingPerson,
VERY well said. That about wraps it up, in my opinion.

 

[Texas_Tickle]

Remember, just because you find it difficult to imagine something, doesn't mean that its universal law.

Here Here!

 

[OBleedingMe]

Thanks, tickler_n_black.

 

[Texas_Tickle]

What about a man who is being tickled by another man, but pretends he is being tickled by a woman?

 

[OBleedingMe]

What about a man who is being tickled by another man, but pretends he is being tickled by a woman?

I covered this in my previous post, TickleMaster.

Here's the answer to your question:

- A man is aroused by tickling or being tickled by another man. He secretly fantasizes about tickling women when engaging in this activity. These are repressed heterosexual tendencies. My advice to these men? Unless you're in a jail cell somewhere, scrape some cash together, and go to places like the Den of Inquity in NY where you can live out your actual fantasies.

 

[Cosmo_ac]

A man is aroused by tickling or being tickled by another man. He fantasizes about the scenario. He masturbates to the scenario. The scenario of m/m tickling gives him an erection. This is arousal between the same sex. This IS homosexual behavior. It does not mean that the man in question enjoys other homosexual activities (anal play, mutual masturbation, etc.). However, to refute that this activity is homosexual behavior is to be in denial.

Wrong. Your assuming that the fact that the target is male is what is causing him to become aroused. It can very well be the simple act of tickling or being tickled that is causing him arousal. If a person in question is aroused by being tickled by a male, yet has no sexual interest in a male, they can not be considered homosexual.

Power Play, Roleplaying, and Control Play do NOT factor into heterosexual or homosexual behavior. Only the sex of the participants factor into it. If you are a man and are sexually aroused by dominating other men, it's homosexual behavior. If you are a man and are sexually aroused by dominating women, it's heterosexual behavior. You see, the activity or action doesn't matter. It matters what arouses you - accomplishing this acitivity with the opposite sex or the same sex. It's that simple.

I disagree again. Activity or Action can matter a great deal. Sadists for example, can enjoy being hurting either sex. Same with Masochists, except with them being on the hurt end.. Fetishes are not always determined by gender.

 

[lk70]

Ok, let's get a little more absurd here...let's say a male is blindfolded and bound. Various acts are performed on him including manual stimulation of the genitals, oral sex and tickling. He doesn't know if the perpetrator is male or female.

He gets aroused.

If the perp is female, but he thinks it's a male, is he gay?

If the perp is male, but he thinks it's a female, is he gay?

If he really doesn't give a damn because it all just feels too damn good, what is he then? (besides invited to a dinner party of fun people at my house?)

 

[isabeau]

Ok, let's get a little more absurd here...let's say a male is blindfolded and bound. Various acts are performed on him including manual stimulation of the genitals, oral sex and tickling. He doesn't know if the perpetrator is male or female.

He gets aroused.

If the perp is female, but he thinks it's a male, is he gay?

If the perp is male, but he thinks it's a female, is he gay?

If he really doesn't give a damn because it all just feels too damn good, what is he then? (besides invited to a dinner party of fun people at my house?)

fantastic answer. i agree with it.

isabeau

 

[Battousai]

If he's wanting to have anal with another man, he IS "being gay."
That's so simple.
If it's with a woman, it's heterosexual.
How hard is this to understand? 🙂
Are you really saying that a man wanting to have anal with another man is somehow not showing gay tendencies? How can you even try and say that?

I don't think you've read the post I was initially replying to. The question was 'if a man wants to have anal sex with a woman, does that make him gay, but he can't face it?'. So basically I'm in agreement with you.

 

[LindyHopper]

Ok, let's get a little more absurd here...let's say a male is blindfolded and bound. Various acts are performed on him including manual stimulation of the genitals, oral sex and tickling. He doesn't know if the perpetrator is male or female.

He gets aroused.

If the perp is female, but he thinks it's a male, is he gay?

If the perp is male, but he thinks it's a female, is he gay?

If he really doesn't give a damn because it all just feels too damn good, what is he then? (besides invited to a dinner party of fun people at my house?)

Oooh, oooh, fun tangent, can I play! 😀

Let's say... I'm a woman, not blindfolded, tied down and being tickled, by, like, six guys and one woman. It's arousing. The whole experience is. But by the end, the woman is the one who holds a vibrator to my panties, and finally gets me to ask for an orgasm. Does that make me gay?

I'm going to go with "no".... even though I have to admit it would make me wonder what else she could do to me if given the chance! 😀 But I'm not gay. Call it denial if you want, but I'm going to call it being aroused by the tickling and dominance itself, not by the fact that it was a woman doing it.

 

[Ticklerguy4u]

Oooh, oooh, fun tangent, can I play! 😀

Let's say... I'm a woman, not blindfolded, tied down and being tickled, by, like, six guys and one woman. It's arousing. The whole experience is. But by the end, the woman is the one who holds a vibrator to my panties, and finally gets me to ask for an orgasm. Does that make me gay?

oooo! ooooooo! *raising hand* can I be one of the guys!!

 

[Texas_Tickle]

Ok, let's get a little more absurd here...let's say a male is blindfolded and bound. Various acts are performed on him including manual stimulation of the genitals, oral sex and tickling. He doesn't know if the perpetrator is male or female.

He gets aroused.

If the perp is female, but he thinks it's a male, is he gay?

If the perp is male, but he thinks it's a female, is he gay?

If he really doesn't give a damn because it all just feels too damn good, what is he then? (besides invited to a dinner party of fun people at my house?)

Very valid points.

 

[Texas_Tickle]

Oooh, oooh, fun tangent, can I play! 😀

Let's say... I'm a woman, not blindfolded, tied down and being tickled, by, like, six guys and one woman. It's arousing. The whole experience is. But by the end, the woman is the one who holds a vibrator to my panties, and finally gets me to ask for an orgasm. Does that make me gay?

And yet another valid argument.

 

[Redmage]

I'm coming late to this party, but I have two questions:

1) There seems to be an ironclad dichotomy here between Kinsey 0 (Absolutely het) and Kinsey 6 (Absolutely homosexual). Why is everyone ignoring the vast region covered by Kinsey 1-5? That's the zone into which most people actually fall, after all, and those people may self-identify as gay, straight, or bisexual. Is there something about the B-word that's taboo here?

2) Why does it matter if a man can be aroused by the touch of another man?

I've often said that "normal" is just another word for "average." And I've never met anyone who said they wanted average sex.

Oooh, oooh, fun tangent, can I play! 😀

Let's say... I'm a woman, not blindfolded, tied down and being tickled, by, like, six guys and one woman. It's arousing. The whole experience is. But by the end, the woman is the one who holds a vibrator to my panties, and finally gets me to ask for an orgasm. Does that make me gay?

I'm going to go with "no".... even though I have to admit it would make me wonder what else she could do to me if given the chance! 😀 But I'm not gay. Call it denial if you want, but I'm going to call it being aroused by the tickling and dominance itself, not by the fact that it was a woman doing it.

I wouldn't call it denial - one label is as good as another, and you have a better shot than most at knowing which label fits you best. All I would say is that in a scenario like that if you aren't repelled by getting sexual attention and stimulation from a woman, then you at least aren't desperately attached to your heterosexuality.

 

[lk70]

1) There seems to be an ironclad dichotomy here between Kinsey 0 (Absolutely het) and Kinsey 6 (Absolutely homosexual). Why is everyone ignoring the vast region covered by Kinsey 1-5? That's the zone into which most people actually fall, after all, and those people may self-identify as gay, straight, or bisexual. Is there something about the B-word that's taboo here?

Actually, Red, I'm right with you on this point. Absolutely I think sexuality is more of a pendulum with people falling on all points along the arc. I made that point in another thread awhile ago, as a matter of fact, but it seemed to muddy the waters rather than clarify anything- though, come to think of it, I'm not sure clarity's all it's cracked up to be either. 😉

 

[OBleedingMe]

Ok, let's get a little more absurd here...let's say a male is blindfolded and bound. Various acts are performed on him including manual stimulation of the genitals, oral sex and tickling. He doesn't know if the perpetrator is male or female.

He gets aroused.

If the perp is female, but he thinks it's a male, is he gay?

If the perp is male, but he thinks it's a female, is he gay?

If he really doesn't give a damn because it all just feels too damn good, what is he then? (besides invited to a dinner party of fun people at my house?)

Again, this is very simple.

If the man is fantasizing about a female while receiving the unknown stimulation, it is heterosexual behavior.

If the man is fantasizing about a male while receiving the unknown stimulation, it is homosexual behavior.

It doesn't matter what gender is sexually stimulating the man. It matters what the man is thinking about while being stimulated. When the man discovers that the gender who is sexually stimulating him is not the one he is fantasizing about he will be traumatized. Frankly, deliberate gender-deception is just as bad as rape in my book.

The scenario you described sort of reminds me of an old GIF on the net, where a picture of a curvy, tanned female butt is on the screen, but then the picture pulls out to reveal the female butt is really just part of a muscle on a nude man's arm. Now, if a man was aroused when he thought the picture was of a nude female's nether regions, but disgusted when he saw it was a naked man, that would be a heterosexual reaction. If he felt nothing until he saw the nude man, that would be a homosexual reaction. If he was aroused at the thought of a nude female AND a nude male, that would be a bisexual reaction.

To Cosmo:

If you are sexually aroused by the same sex in any capacity, it IS homosexual behavior. The key word here is BEHAVIOR. That means everything from anal intercourse, to BDSM, to tickling, to cuddling. It does not mean the male in question does not enjoy sexual attention from females. Heck, it doens't mean that the male in question doesn't enjoy the same activities with a female. It just means that the male in question DOES participate in homosexual activities.

You mention Sadists and masochists. Being I am an active member of the BDSM community, I can tell you that there plenty of straight, gay, and bi Tops and bottoms. And just like vanilla sex, the criteria is EXACTLY THE SAME. If you enjoy only a BDSM session with the same sex, that is homosexual behavior. If you enjoy a BDSM session with the opposite sex, that is heterosexual behavior. If you enjoy a BDSM session with both sexes, that is bisexual behavior. Same criteria, different activity. The action or activity does not matter. Only what sex you are accomplishing said activity with.

I really don't see what's so hard about all this. I think all of this fog and mirror talk stems from the need to rationalize homosexual or deviant behavior. They cannot accept their own behavior, so they rationalize it. Self-acceptance, guys. C'mon now.

 

[drew70]

I agree with OBleedingMe. I would go so far as to say that what he states is fact and not opinion. But I realize that it's only my opinion that what he states is fact. Others might state that what OBleedingMe says is opinion, and make that statement as if it were a fact, when in fact it too is also an opinion.

 

[Redmage]

Actually, Red, I'm right with you on this point. Absolutely I think sexuality is more of a pendulum with people falling on all points along the arc. I made that point in another thread awhile ago, as a matter of fact, but it seemed to muddy the waters rather than clarify anything- though, come to think of it, I'm not sure clarity's all it's cracked up to be either. 😉

I think clarity's great, as long as it's not artificial. Too often I see folks oversimplifying in the name of "clarity" - presenting a situation that is inherently complex and ambiguous in black and white terms. Human sexuality is a big one for that treatment.

Again, this is very simple.

If the man is fantasizing about a female while receiving the unknown stimulation, it is heterosexual behavior.

If the man is fantasizing about a male while receiving the unknown stimulation, it is homosexual behavior.

Case in point: What if he's not fantasizing about any particular gender, but imagining the sensations coming from a sexless machine or robot? What if he's not putting a "face" to sensations at all, but simply enjoying them?

Any discussion of human sexuality that begins with "this is very simple" is heading for the rocks.

I really don't see what's so hard about all this. I think all of this fog and mirror talk stems from the need to rationalize homosexual or deviant behavior. They cannot accept their own behavior, so they rationalize it. Self-acceptance, guys. C'mon now.

I think that self-acceptance begins with dropping terms like "deviant." That's a term that some would apply to erotic tickling - indeed to anything but the missionary position with the lights off.

Alfred Kinsey said it best: "The only 'unnatural' sex act is one that you are physically incapable of performing."

 

[LindyHopper]

I wouldn't call it denial - one label is as good as another, and you have a better shot than most at knowing which label fits you best. All I would say is that in a scenario like that if you aren't repelled by getting sexual attention and stimulation from a woman, then you at least aren't desperately attached to your heterosexuality.

Perhaps. 😉 But I think it would be more accurate to say that my homophobia wasn't getting in the way of enjoying the sexual attention. I tend to think that a "desperate" attachment to heterosexuality has more to do with fear of being gay than it does with the strength of the attraction to MOS. It's anxiety, or closed-mindedness, not being "more" straight.

Maybe that's something we're missing here in this whole M/M tickling discussion. There's a difference between not being repelled by engaging in tickling a member of the same sex, and actually desiring it in and of itself. A man who's not homophobic would be able to appreciate, say, engaging in competitive wrestling as a sport, while a more homophobic man would not. Similarly, I can imagine a straight man, who is completely comfortable with himself and his sexuality, enjoying engaging in tickling with another man. He's enjoying the sensations, and the power exchange, and the laughter. Experiencing these things with a woman, who's the actual the target of his sexual desire, would certainly add another layer of pleasure to the experience. Still, he figures, there are still aspects of tickling that are worth enjoying anyway, even without the sexual attraction.

Or, maybe I'm just some in-denial, bi-sexual, crack-pot. You be the judge. 😉

 

[Redmage]

Perhaps. 😉 But I think it would be more accurate to say that my homophobia wasn't getting in the way of enjoying the sexual attention. I tend to think that a "desperate" attachment to heterosexuality has more to do with fear of being gay than it does with the strength of the attraction to MOS. It's anxiety, or closed-mindedness, not being "more" straight.

I'd agree with that. I think we're saying the same thing.

I remember a lady I dated many years ago, when she began exploring her bisexuality. She was terribly nervous about it. One evening I got a call from her at about 10PM. She was calling from a bar. An odd conversation ensued.

"I met this woman for a drink," she said urgently, "and now she wants to take me back to her place! What do I do??"

I replied, "Sounds like good news to me. What's the problem?"

"But I don't know if I'm bisexual!"

"Look," I said. "Do you think she's hot?"

"Well...yes."

"OK. And you think some guys are sexy?"

"You know I do."

"All right then. Sounds to me like you're bisexual. Go have fun."

"But...but..." her voice dropped to an urgent whisper, "what if I like it??"

At that point I chivvied her off the phone and out to her date. She liked it.

Or, maybe I'm just some in-denial, bi-sexual, crack-pot. You be the judge. 😉

Oh, I never would. Self-indentification is self-indentification, and it's not usually useful to second-guess. You're many things, my dear LindyHopper, but cracked isn't one of them. If in fact you're bisexual then I'm sure you'll figure it out in good time. If you're a nice het girl who's secure enough to accept attention from anyone, then that's even more rare and special.