Mainstream

[van83]

Mainstream

 

[bstntklr]

HI
Thanks for posting.. allow me to give some details as to what the clips are...
1 .. is from French In Action a language teaching PBS show where a young girl tickles her hot college age sister's foot on a couple of occassions this time with a feather.
2... from Nickelodeon's You Can't Do That On TV.. female character called Moose has her foot tickled while her leg is in a cast and she can't get away
3... is from Ferris Bueler's Day Off where the girl character we assume is tickled on her feet in a car by Ferris but we don't see the tickling only her very nice laughter and squirming
The quality of the clips is not the best but they are small files sooooooooo the choice is yours.

Ciao,
John

 

[nessonite1]

Ill have to look the other 2 up but I removed the middle one as it was underage. Please make note of the rules.

 

[teaseNtickler1]

The tickling in Ferris Buehler is completely off camera, but Mia (last name?) said in an interview that he pulled off her shoe and tickled her. It was not scripted, he just wanted to make her mess up since he was on the floor at her feet in the back of the car and she was supposed to be acting cool looking out the window.

Great reaction huh?

 

[Red_Butler]

Question for Nessonite

Isn't it exaggerating to ban clips here that are allowed on public television?

 

[nessonite1]

it's called "covering our asses". It may be going a beyond what we need to do to stay legal but having images of children engaged in an otherwise perfectly innocent act when put into the context of this forum would be an invitation for all sorts of watchdogs to come look us over. If complaints are made the site could be dropped from the servers with no questions asked.

 

[Cynthia_Massol]

it's called "covering our asses". It may be going a beyond what we need to do to stay legal but having images of children engaged in an otherwise perfectly innocent act when put into the context of this forum would be an invitation for all sorts of watchdogs to come look us over. If complaints are made the site could be dropped from the servers with no questions asked.

For when the ban of tickled children in cartoons, like "Ninja Turtles" and other like this ?

 

[nessonite1]

Cartoons are different. Since they're just drawings and not of real people they are allowed though we still dont allow anything obviously perverse or in any way sexually charged. it's pretty much case by case.

 

[Venom3602]

Isn't it exaggerating to ban clips here that are allowed on public television?

Children in swimsuits are allowed on public television. Children in swimsuits are not allowed on fetish forums. Context makes a difference.

 

[fmharmony1]

So, by that logic....

Cartoons are different. Since they're just drawings and not of real people they are allowed though we still dont allow anything obviously perverse or in any way sexually charged. it's pretty much case by case.

Don't mean to be antagonistic, but I've heard this sort of argument before. Obviously, you wouldn't allow a clip of a child bieng sexually molested -- but would you allow an animated clip of a child being molested, just because it's not a real kid...? Frankly, it seems intellectually dishonest to allow "fake" underage material while banning real underage material. It's more than just content and context -- it's also got to include intent.

 

[nessonite1]

Like I said we look at it pretty much on a case by case basis as it IS a grey area. Basically if a minor is being pictured in a drawing/cartooon there can be no sexual overtones to it whatsoever.

 

[Cynthia_Massol]

Children in swimsuits are allowed on public television. Children in swimsuits are not allowed on fetish forums. Context makes a difference.

Why don't change the forum name "TickleTheater" to "PublicTheater" in order to can view all that we wish to view ? And for the same occasion, for those who are shocked by viewing children in swimsuit on public TV, they can add "Tickle..." on their TV show name to be allowed to remove them ;-)

 

[Cynthia_Massol]

Don't mean to be antagonistic, but I've heard this sort of argument before. Obviously, you wouldn't allow a clip of a child bieng sexually molested -- but would you allow an animated clip of a child being molested, just because it's not a real kid...? Frankly, it seems intellectually dishonest to allow "fake" underage material while banning real underage material. It's more than just content and context -- it's also got to include intent.

You're absolutely right ! It's like a McCarthy idea, all of this... I think that pervert lifestyle makes pervert art (videos, cartoons...), but i'm not sure the contrary is right, i don't think that pervert art makes people pervert.
When someone watch an horror film, i'm nor convinced that he will be a satanist, as i'm convinced that watching and watching olympic games movies all days long won't turn me as an olympic champion, but i can just enjoy watching it, for my dreams.