Not telling the girl

[oceanhead]

Grammar abuse aside, let's say you tie up your girlfriend for fun/sex/whatever. She doesn't know about the tickling yet. To start with she must be fine with bondage to agree to it. So you tickle her for a brief moment. So what? She's your girlfriend! She trusts you to tie her up so she'll trust you to respect her wishes if she doesn't want to be tickled.

you should never assume that just because you're in a relationship with someone that you don't need to discuss things like this before you do them. consent should never be assumed.

i'm going to repeat that in boldface. consent should never be assumed.

if someone trusts you enough to let you tie her up she probably trusts you enough to sit down and have a conversation about your feelings and desires.

play safe, people. goddess.

 

[whistler1]

you should never assume that just because you're in a relationship with someone that you don't need to discuss things like this before you do them. consent should never be assumed.

i'm going to repeat that in boldface. consent should never be assumed.

if someone trusts you enough to let you tie her up she probably trusts you enough to sit down and have a conversation about your feelings and desires.

play safe, people. goddess.

Perhaps you just skimmed over my post, or maybe you 'accidently' blocked it from your reading view but I'll say it again in boldface

She trusts you to tie her up so she'll trust you to respect her wishes if she doesn't want to be tickled.

There. I even increased the font size for you, just in case 😉. Now I'm not sure what language you speak, but in English that means if she does not want to be tickled then you don't tickle her.

 

[kis123]

And some girls very well might be ok with it...as we've seen from other posts...

But, I have the feeling that the intention of the initial post was that he wants to tie her up and just have at it--no warning, or an initial quick tickling and checking if she is ok with more...that's how I took it at least. And most women would probably not be ok with being tied up and tickled, hence why so many on here constantly lament about the lack of willing lees.

Theres no need for a flame war here, folks...let's just have a human, decent, calm discussion...we're all adults here.

This is what I got out of the initial post that there was no discussion and no consent. That the bondage was for sexual purposes and NOT for tickling! When I read the initial post, that's what I got. Based on what I read from it, I responded APPROPRIATELY!!

No one's flaming anyone, at least I am not. Whistler seems to have a problem with people who disagree with his opinions. If you post in a thread and someone disagrees with you, then they disagree-so what??

 

[kis123]

my god, you people are like vultures.



well done for completely missing my point.

Grammar abuse aside, let's say you tie up your girlfriend for fun/sex/whatever. She doesn't know about the tickling yet. To start with she must be fine with bondage to agree to it. So you tickle her for a brief moment. So what? She's your girlfriend! She trusts you to tie her up so she'll trust you to respect her wishes if she doesn't want to be tickled. Of course if she refuses but you carry on anyway then that of course is wrong, but the original post did not specify this. However, all of you have immediately assumed the worst case scenario and replied with various keyboard warrior type replies.

Some of you need to take a step back and think before you start flaming.

And finally you all seemed to have happily ignored 'ftmench' who actually admitting to doing this and now we see that 'tbird01450' has also done this and the girl did not complain, cry rape or kick him in the nuts. She also said she would do it again!



This is what you call a discussion? Seems more like an angry mob ready to stone someone to death for trying something like this. And when I try to play devils advocat, 3 of you instantly flame me.

Had it crossed your mind that some girls might be OK with it?

What seems to be the problem here?

I read the INITIAL post and the poster is talking about NON CONSENTUAL, not assumed, and certainly unexpected. If you read something differently, you're entitled to your opinion.

Just because some other women enjoyed their experiences doesn't mean that all women would-I certainly would not. Once I got loose from my bonds, he'd pay painfully!

Give me a break-grammar abuse? You're just upset with anyone who disagrees with you so you start mudslinging and saying anything that comes to your head. If anyone is flaming, it is YOU!!

What a shame, I thought this was a discussion board, not a flaming, backbiting, name-calling, argument board.

My responses will not change simply because you disagree with them.

 

[Camel26]

And a warning, Whistler dear...you were upset about people flaming you and being rude, in your opinion, to you...but now it's YOU doing the flaming and being rude...

This is a discussion site...we all have a common interest...so let's all get along...we're all entitled to our opinions...but when people start getting rude/mean/unnecessary...well, let's just say the mods don't take kindly to it...and neither does the rest of the community.

 

[cpr1815]

What seems to be the problem here?

I read the INITIAL post and the poster is talking about NON CONSENTUAL, not assumed, and certainly unexpected. If you read something differently, you're entitled to your opinion.

Just because some other women enjoyed their experiences doesn't mean that all women would-I certainly would not. Once I got loose from my bonds, he'd pay painfully!

Give me a break-grammar abuse? You're just upset with anyone who disagrees with you so you start mudslinging and saying anything that comes to your head. If anyone is flaming, it is YOU!!

What a shame, I thought this was a discussion board, not a flaming, backbiting, name-calling, argument board.

My responses will not change simply because you disagree with them.

Kis123, don't even worry about it. Obviously he feels very different on the issue, even if he doesn't respect how others do not agree with his own opinion, as he mentioned in his first post on this thread, so there's no point in debating with someone like that. We can be satisfied knowing that most people here know what the original topic is and that tickle torturing a tied up person without permission is wrong. All we can do now is ignore those who would ridicule us for having a moral approach to this subject. I have a feeling that this thread won't be around much longer anyhow lol.

 

[whistler1]

You did read the initial post, right? It discusses tying up a girl, not telling her "you're" going to tickle her, then basically exploit and assault her for "your" own fetish benefit (all the "you's" are hypothetical).

Common sense would dictate that whatever consequences suffered afterwards would be very much deserved.

I think you'll find that this comment is patronising hence the long post by me following this.

You completely missed my point. I gave him the benefit of the doubt and you didn't like it because I didn't jump in the 'kick him in the nuts' bandwagon.

I'm not asking anyone to agree with me! I just put across a possible scenario that didn't assume JaredG had the worst intentions. I guess I am very naive to think most people have the common sense not to tickle an unwilling victim.

How exactly am I flaming anybody? I was patronised twice, once by kis123 and again by oceanhead with his 'repeating in boldface for stupid people' statement. I responded appropriately and in an equally patronising manner.

If you read my first post in this thread, I called people over-cautious. Is that flaming? I think not. But I got flamed for saying it!

As for the original post:

Has anyone ever told a girl that they just wanted to try tying her up and not said anything about tickling, and once she was tied up you started to tickle torture her? What was her reaction?

Notice how he said started to. To me, this implies he would start to tickle her, not tickle her for 2 hours while she screams to be let out. He was also interested in her reaction. Again, I took this as her inital reaction since one assumes this girl is not into tickling so either her reaction will be either "stop the tickling, I don't like it" or "this is fine you can carry on". The tickler would then act appropriately.

OK I've put my point across. No flaming, no imaginary rude comments. I await the next flood of replies.

 

[kis123]

Kis123, don't even worry about it. Obviously he feels very different on the issue, even if he doesn't respect how others do not agree with his own opinion, as he mentioned in his first post on this thread, so there's no point in debating with someone like that. We can be satisfied knowing that most people here know what the original topic is and that tickle torturing a tied up person without permission is wrong. All we can do now is ignore those who would ridicule us for having a moral approach to this subject. I have a feeling that this thread won't be around much longer anyhow lol.

I couldn't agree more.

I've said my piece on the matter and attempted to explain my point. I'm pretty much done here. I have substantially more important things to do than this.

Thank you for your support. I didn't do ANYTHING wrong anyway.

 

[whistler1]

So basically, you posted for no reason? Not flaming, just wondering why you even bothered to post at all. Could it be because I have a valid point and you don't want to admit it?

Everyone can see your point, but no one is willing to open their mind to another possibility. Pity.

 

[ftmench]

I have posted on this subject before and not only did I marry the person I did this to, but on four other occasions did the same thing....different strokes people.
Nuff said. I had no problems, and they did not either.
Don't be so damn sensitive...they did not feel raped at all but it opened a world they did not know.
D

 

[Ethereal]

strangely, I see what whistle sees.

but only because I think the poster worded his question wrong. It seems like he's trying to ask "you start to do it, to see what she says.." as in he cares if she likes it or not.

and the only reason I don't think it's OMG NON-CONSENT, is because my gf and I have treated our relationship as a free to experiment kinda thing.

as in, when she restrains me, she'll try new things, and if I don't like it, I'll say no. And to be honest, a quick tickle doesn't seem so bad if you trust each other.

however as to gain her trust, then make a 2 hour session out of it. what the fuck no.
edit: re-read = OP's scenario is still very sketchy. 😛 VERY SKETCHY. But then again I naively try to see good in people.

 

[MistressValerie1]

Ethereal stated his position constructively and courteously, which is all that we can ask of anyone.

We will be watching this discussion very closely and will take all necessary action if the thread starts going downhill again.

 

[Crockpot]

I'd be loathe to "surprise" her with that sort of thing. I think most girls would find it to be weird, and a little creepy.

 

[nessonite1]

anybody who feels they cannot continue this discussion in a manner muchmore civilized than it has been at times are kindly asked to end their participation in this thread.

 

[brotherted]

Hopefully most women would react by kicking the offender in the crotch while calling the police.

As the previous post said, doesn't this all depend on how long the tickling lasts?

I've tied a few girls up a few times, and I ALWAYS do some tickling... just not so much that she thinks it's the main event, but rather just one of many stages to the experience.

 

[brotherted]

you should never assume that just because you're in a relationship with someone that you don't need to discuss things like this before you do them. consent should never be assumed.

i'm going to repeat that in boldface. consent should never be assumed.

if someone trusts you enough to let you tie her up she probably trusts you enough to sit down and have a conversation about your feelings and desires.

play safe, people. goddess.

My reaction to this entire thread was exactly the same as Whistler's.

Posts like the one above make it sound like the authors, in their own lives, have obtained verbal consent before every act every time.

"Can I touch you on the arm?"
"Can I hold your hand?"
"Do you mind if I kiss you?"
"Can I touch the area around your right breast?"
"Can I tickle your sides?"

What romance!

Seriously, does this logic reduce a spontaneous, romantic kiss with someone for the first time -- to a sex crime?

That's absurd. It doesn't take a genius to tickle a little and gauge the reaction; if it's negative, you stop, whether she's tied up or not.

No different than a first kiss -- which I believe, in my own crazed-sex-offender-logic -- shouldn't require a permission slip.

 

[George Hull]

Tied women up a few times, always tickled them, never told them in advance, never had one call a cop or a lawyer, frequently saw them several more times after the experience. Some of them treated it like a joke afterwards, a few of them seemed really pissed but got over it.

Once after I'd tied a girl nice and helpless to her own bed I slipped a tickle video in her VCR and said "Watch carefully, this is what I'm gonna do to YOU!" then I hit play and left her alone until the video was over! Talk about building up tension in a "victim"! Heh heh heh heh heh.....

 

[Camel26]

Once after I'd tied a girl nice and helpless to her own bed I slipped a tickle video in her VCR and said "Watch carefully, this is what I'm gonna do to YOU!" then I hit play and left her alone until the video was over! Talk about building up tension in a "victim"! Heh heh heh heh heh.....

That is HOTT!!! Well done biggeorge!!! 😀

 

[guest5]

Once after I'd tied a girl nice and helpless to her own bed I slipped a tickle video in her VCR and said "Watch carefully, this is what I'm gonna do to YOU!" then I hit play and left her alone until the video was over! Talk about building up tension in a "victim"! Heh heh heh heh heh.....

wow, i have to agree. that is very hot. talk about making a person anticipate their fate. that's enough to drive a person wild. hee hee very evil yet so cool🙂

bonster27

 

[Journia]

Ha, I would go hester prynne on her....

I'll never tell!

 

[sole seeker1]

Tied women up a few times, always tickled them, never told them in advance, never had one call a cop or a lawyer, frequently saw them several more times after the experience.

Ditto. No problems here. In fact, five out of six of these ladies came back for more repeatedly, and only one of them was into tickling. The others got off from other activities we engaged in during bondage and lovemaking.

 

[kis123]

Has anyone ever told a girl that they just wanted to try tying her up and not said anything about tickling, and once she was tied up you started to tickle torture her? What was her reaction?

I based my responses based on this exact post. JaredG says NOTHING about tickling foreplay-he mentions TICKLE TORTURE!! I guess this all depends on what one perceives as tickle torture.

Judging by many of the responses here, you think it's okay not to discuss something like this BEFORE you tie the girl up. I guess you think it's okay just because she ended up liking it and coming back for more. I guess you should consider yourselves lucky she did like it. It also goes to show that there are some women out here who don't mind being violated just as long as it ends up feeling good in the end.

Stuff like this is the major reason why I've never consented to restraints and probably never will. When someone gives another the level of trust to submit to bondage, possibilities should be discussed in advance and not changed after the ropes go on.