-
If you would like to get your account Verified, read this thread -
The TMF is sponsored by Clips4sale - By supporting them, you're supporting us. -
>>> If you cannot get into your account email me at [email protected] <<<
Don't forget to include your username
RottingLies
TMF Regular
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2004
- Messages
- 223
- Points
- 0
*Phew* for a minute there i though you said Insect clips! 😛 Just kidding. Just having a little fun. welcome to TT MaxDragon glad you joined this website
RottingLies
TMF Regular
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2004
- Messages
- 223
- Points
- 0
SerenaW said:
why are the three clips scary SerenaW?
maniactickler38
TMF Expert
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2003
- Messages
- 596
- Points
- 0
Awesome!!
wicked_Angel
Registered User
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2004
- Messages
- 14
- Points
- 0
I"m sry but how could anyone like those vid clips. That is just so wrong for women. I'm surprised that there are even women like that
ticklevids
TMF Master
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2001
- Messages
- 828
- Points
- 18
Man... what a pleasure to see something REAL. Thanks for posting....
for all the others who " dont' get it", keep your judgements to yourself...
for all the others who " dont' get it", keep your judgements to yourself...
Stephentickle
Registered User
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2003
- Messages
- 46
- Points
- 0
For me, personally, these clips make me uneasy...I guess I'm more into the playful stuff where I know that the victims seem more like willing partners than prisoners. Maybe when the threat is more "real" it bothers me. I can't stand to see a victim tied and tickled literally to the point of tears. These women obviously weren't that intensely ticklish, but I must say that a few clips that I have downloaded and viewed here were more torture than tickle! And when a woman is tied by her ankle and hoisted up like a side of beef...hmmmm....don't know if I can appreciate that.
sexygamedesigns1
3rd Level Red Feather
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2003
- Messages
- 1,555
- Points
- 0
These aren't my usual cup of tea but I still enjoyed them. I figure that its all a roleplay and that people have different turn ons. I am sure there are women out there who get off on being restrained like this. It takes all sorts, in my opinion.
R
R
I don't feel sorry for the women at all. They weren't kidnapped by the KGB and tortured for top secret information. They woke up, got out of bed, ate, took a shower, got dressed- just like everyone else who goes to work- got in their cars, drove there and said "Ok, I'm ready!" They LIKE doing that stuff and they get paid well. That's what does it for them, just like tickling does it for us...in all forms. The funny thing is that no matter what your fetish, you can always talk about other people and say that theirs is "worse".
mexicantickler1
Registered User
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 4
- Points
- 0
thnx for the contribution
and I'm sorry, but I don't like it... that kind of stuffs make the people think all of we are sick... and honestly, it make me think the same...
and I'm sorry, but I don't like it... that kind of stuffs make the people think all of we are sick... and honestly, it make me think the same...
Brokenlamp
TMF Poster
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2003
- Messages
- 82
- Points
- 0
I love that kinda of stuff, if you(or anybody else) has more clips like this please post them!
Blackstar216
TMF Expert
- Joined
- May 2, 2001
- Messages
- 315
- Points
- 0
1. Those clips were made for bondage fans, not tickling fans. (That's just to say that it has zero stereotypical effect on tickling fetishists.)
2. If it makes many uneasy, that's okay. 2 years ago, it would have made me cringe too.
3. I won't try and detail heavier BDSM play/fetishism. But part of the appeal is a consent to be treated non-consentually (if that makes any sense). Within hard limits it has as much appeal to those into it (female and male subs) as tickling does to us. Guess the idea of fetishes is that they all vary so much that they aren't for everyone.
2. If it makes many uneasy, that's okay. 2 years ago, it would have made me cringe too.
3. I won't try and detail heavier BDSM play/fetishism. But part of the appeal is a consent to be treated non-consentually (if that makes any sense). Within hard limits it has as much appeal to those into it (female and male subs) as tickling does to us. Guess the idea of fetishes is that they all vary so much that they aren't for everyone.
ceecee2335
Registered User
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2004
- Messages
- 16
- Points
- 0
These clips focus more on the S & M side of tickling... and there are people who like that.
Aside from the part where she was "hoisted up like a side of beef".... giggle I enjoyed the clips.
For me... I like tickling different ways. I love it playful, sensual, and yes, I do like torturous tickling. That would probably explain why I did like the clips.
CeeCee
Aside from the part where she was "hoisted up like a side of beef".... giggle I enjoyed the clips.
For me... I like tickling different ways. I love it playful, sensual, and yes, I do like torturous tickling. That would probably explain why I did like the clips.
CeeCee
VeganTickle1
Registered User
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2002
- Messages
- 31
- Points
- 0
Objection your honour!
English is not my mother tangue, hence I am not familiar with the term "a side of beef". Yet it does have a horrible ring to it.
"A side of beef" if I got it right, used to be a living, feeling, being, that was brutally killed for its flesh, probably - after a life of suffering it shouldn't have been born into in the first place.
Yet somehow "a side of beef" has such a remote, morally inertic ring to it...
Given the choice which one of the "hoisting up"s I have a problem with - the one in the clips, or the one of animals - I will have to say: the one of slaughtered animals!
The content in the clips where not my thing, but hey - assuming that these clips where done with the willing, free choice and consent - of all participants - Anything is ok between consenting, responsible adults.
Yet some had a great problem with that... but not with the the other type of "hoisting up"! ha!
English is not my mother tangue, hence I am not familiar with the term "a side of beef". Yet it does have a horrible ring to it.
"A side of beef" if I got it right, used to be a living, feeling, being, that was brutally killed for its flesh, probably - after a life of suffering it shouldn't have been born into in the first place.
Yet somehow "a side of beef" has such a remote, morally inertic ring to it...
Given the choice which one of the "hoisting up"s I have a problem with - the one in the clips, or the one of animals - I will have to say: the one of slaughtered animals!
The content in the clips where not my thing, but hey - assuming that these clips where done with the willing, free choice and consent - of all participants - Anything is ok between consenting, responsible adults.
Yet some had a great problem with that... but not with the the other type of "hoisting up"! ha!
Dude'sonfire
TMF Expert
- Joined
- May 9, 2004
- Messages
- 374
- Points
- 0
One thing about "tickle torture", for me at least, is the idea that it isnt consentual, and that the woman quite literally does not want to be there. If this is an issue of morals, then I accept that to a lot of people i'm evil and sadistic for liking non consensual stuff, but i cant say that it bothers me. One of the reasons fetishes exist in so many forms is because many morals of society are largely unnatural, and people want to escape them. Lets face it, to many people a woman who's desperate and cant do anything about it is incredibly arousing, especially when they know it's real. Social conscience says you shouldnt like it, but your body says you should. I guess for me its about finding a balance.
Dr. Ticklefesto
TMF Expert
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2003
- Messages
- 460
- Points
- 0
Let me guess: Your Christian?Navel_ticklish said:
MistressValerie1
Administrator
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2003
- Messages
- 8,736
- Points
- 0
Dr. Ticklefesto
TMF Expert
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2003
- Messages
- 460
- Points
- 0
Oh come now, what fun is the internet if we must be civil? 😛
khorneflake
Registered User
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2002
- Messages
- 28
- Points
- 0
love them!! there's no tickling like torture tickling 😉
thanks a lot! 😀
thanks a lot! 😀
intofemfeet1
TMF Novice
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2002
- Messages
- 67
- Points
- 0
If you don't like it, delete it! If you love it, save it and watch it daily!
Now SHUT UP and do something constructive!
Now SHUT UP and do something constructive!
medikation65
TMF Master
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2001
- Messages
- 611
- Points
- 0
A few things:
First, I watched all three clips, and the middle one is good when the guy tickles the bottom of her socked foot, let's face it! She's a ticklish girl! Also, I will agree that I think it catered to the bondage side of people moreso then the tickling side. And as far as being "hoisted like beef", I love beef. Steak, burgers, bacon, I LOVE it all! Nothing wrong with eating meat. Yum!
First, I watched all three clips, and the middle one is good when the guy tickles the bottom of her socked foot, let's face it! She's a ticklish girl! Also, I will agree that I think it catered to the bondage side of people moreso then the tickling side. And as far as being "hoisted like beef", I love beef. Steak, burgers, bacon, I LOVE it all! Nothing wrong with eating meat. Yum!
VeganTickle1
Registered User
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2002
- Messages
- 31
- Points
- 0
I beg to differ
I wish to introduce - to the best of my lame english - the rationale behind the "loony" vegan / vegetarian population - as I see it.
I suppose there will be no disagreement in the point that animals suffer throughout their lives in the industurialized factory farm (please see "meet your meat"). I also suppose there will be no disagreement that being slaughtered - no matter how "humanely" it is done - would definitely kill one's day.
The rules of supply and demand dictate that the exsistance of a demand for meat - results in production. The industry's aim is to supply exactly the demand, and not a gram more - because a superfolous gram of meat will not be sold, and is pure loss.
true - one person's consumer's habbits are negligable. but 2% of the population? 4%? and what about more?
This is more or less the same as election: One vote is meaningless, but 2% make one a winner or a loser...
By eating meat - or should I say - buying meat - one actively supports an industry that is no less than cruelty and death to animals. There is no way around it.
The question at hand is, hence: is it worth it? is hurting animals to such an extent justified? If eating meat was a condition to survival - than one could easily claim: "I eat meat to survive, and hence it is my life against the animals'".
However this claim is easily contredicted. Unlike cats, for example, which are carnivors, and inevitably start suffering of defficiency deseases shortly after being avoided of meat - Humans live well on a balanced vegetarian diet.
Every diet has some tradeoffs. However all in all it appears a balanced vegetarian / vegan diet compares favourably with non vegetarian diets.
If it is not a matter of survival, what is left then? habbit? pleasure? These are basicly driven from culture. Most of the readers would think it is disgusting to eat dogs and cats, for example, while in certain civilizations in the far east it is a delicacy! The culture and habbit there make them see dogs as a delicacy. They, on the other hand, may wonder how can "we" eat a "cute animal" such as a rabbit! (or cow)
Is huring animals an inertic act? not if it is not done for the purpose of self preservation. but if it is indeed not a matter of self perservaition, how can it be justified unless, simply "animals are not inportant"..?
oh yeah - that's right - animals are not important, or - at the very least - their suffering and hurt is only marginally important - Thats the only way one can justify taking their very lives away - for a non-essential momentary pleasure, isn't it?
That's not new, guys. Throughout history, there always have been those who are "inferior" - down to a point where their interests, suffering, and lives - are meaningless. question is: can this view protect itself philosophicly for long? I doubt it. Prof. Peter Singer, in the first book aimed at the general public in bioethics "Animal Liberation" demonstrates how seeing animals as means of production, or "goods" or things - cannot really pass even the most basic moral test.
If that makes me a loony, than I can only say:
German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer once said: "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."
I wish to introduce - to the best of my lame english - the rationale behind the "loony" vegan / vegetarian population - as I see it.
I suppose there will be no disagreement in the point that animals suffer throughout their lives in the industurialized factory farm (please see "meet your meat"). I also suppose there will be no disagreement that being slaughtered - no matter how "humanely" it is done - would definitely kill one's day.
The rules of supply and demand dictate that the exsistance of a demand for meat - results in production. The industry's aim is to supply exactly the demand, and not a gram more - because a superfolous gram of meat will not be sold, and is pure loss.
true - one person's consumer's habbits are negligable. but 2% of the population? 4%? and what about more?
This is more or less the same as election: One vote is meaningless, but 2% make one a winner or a loser...
By eating meat - or should I say - buying meat - one actively supports an industry that is no less than cruelty and death to animals. There is no way around it.
The question at hand is, hence: is it worth it? is hurting animals to such an extent justified? If eating meat was a condition to survival - than one could easily claim: "I eat meat to survive, and hence it is my life against the animals'".
However this claim is easily contredicted. Unlike cats, for example, which are carnivors, and inevitably start suffering of defficiency deseases shortly after being avoided of meat - Humans live well on a balanced vegetarian diet.
Every diet has some tradeoffs. However all in all it appears a balanced vegetarian / vegan diet compares favourably with non vegetarian diets.
If it is not a matter of survival, what is left then? habbit? pleasure? These are basicly driven from culture. Most of the readers would think it is disgusting to eat dogs and cats, for example, while in certain civilizations in the far east it is a delicacy! The culture and habbit there make them see dogs as a delicacy. They, on the other hand, may wonder how can "we" eat a "cute animal" such as a rabbit! (or cow)
Is huring animals an inertic act? not if it is not done for the purpose of self preservation. but if it is indeed not a matter of self perservaition, how can it be justified unless, simply "animals are not inportant"..?
oh yeah - that's right - animals are not important, or - at the very least - their suffering and hurt is only marginally important - Thats the only way one can justify taking their very lives away - for a non-essential momentary pleasure, isn't it?
That's not new, guys. Throughout history, there always have been those who are "inferior" - down to a point where their interests, suffering, and lives - are meaningless. question is: can this view protect itself philosophicly for long? I doubt it. Prof. Peter Singer, in the first book aimed at the general public in bioethics "Animal Liberation" demonstrates how seeing animals as means of production, or "goods" or things - cannot really pass even the most basic moral test.
If that makes me a loony, than I can only say:
German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer once said: "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."
Last edited:
