So, where do I fit in?

[kopfhorer1]

Anna Kent Rush in her landmark “Back Rub Book” (which I highly recommend BTW) described the class of people which I fall into - “tickle junkies”. As well as I can recall (I don't have the book handy), she describes us thusly: “certain kinds of touches which would have most of us confessing our darkest family secrets instead send the tickle junkie into a state of alpha-wave bliss”. I've read at least one personal story here in which the male 'ler tickles a female friend's foot with a hairbrush and when he asks her “Doesn't that tickle?”, she replies “No, it feels good!”

Tickling has no sexual significance for me by itself. I have no fetish for it. (I do have a foot fetish as do some ticklephiles, but I'll discuss that later!). Like all of you, I love to read tickling stories and look at tickling cartoons (shout-outs to Nessonite, Tomato Dragon, Littlebighead, Kalamos, Pabuluz, Grippedchimp and the other great cartoonists here whose names escape me now). In the tickling community however, I feel like i'm a minority. I guess the terminology for someone like myself is “sensual tickler/'lee”.

It's tough to find someone who's into this particular mode of tickling. One girlfriend couldn't possibly conceive of touching me in a manner which she herself absolutely detested. Another never quite got into doing my favorite kind of touch with me that often (or else we uh, got distracted by other things).

Tickletheater is a much more positive, happy place than most sex sites on the web (which I suppose given the subject matter is only to be expected!). Much of the tickling portrayed or discussed here seems to be associated with bondage. Although I'm not into bondage, but see nothing at all wrong with the tied-and-tickled kind of scene or the people who enjoy it, I'm wondering where I fit into the tickling scene, or if indeed I do at all?

 

[TKLVR181]

Well, there's nothing wrong with sensual as opposed to sexual feelings for it--though I think that still qualifies as a 'fetish', as much as I hate the word myself. Personally, my favorite to give and recieve are the playful type as opposed to the sexual/sensual type. Nothing wrong with a bit of diversity :super_hap

~K

 

[Dr. Bill Kobb]

😱 I read that as "nothing wrong with a bit of perversity", which probably sums-up where I'm coming from in this matter.

You raise a very good question, though, kopfhorer. Not the one about whether you belong or not, for most surely you do!
I just genuinely feel that tickling sets off different sensations in different people. Or perhaps I should say that different people react to tickling differently, and thus see it in different terms. For me, it is very much a sexual thing. On the recieving end, if I am tickled on my foot soles, I'm gonna get very "excited", sexually. There's no controlling that. On the giving end, it's a tremendous turn-on for me to cause that same sensation in others, regadless of their choice in the matter.
So, that being said, I suppose it can be surmissed that I prefer similar, "sexual" ticklers/lees for play.

BUT, there will always be a place for the more "sensual"(I prefer "non-sexual", actually) ticklings. In fact, I wonder if they don't outnumber the "sexual" contingent? Probably not.

Maybe it goes back to early ticklings, and how one resonded to early experiences? I dunno.

One of the things that I find so fascinating about tickling is the wide variance displayed within the "community" at large.

 

[brad1701]

I think what you're into is a more egalitarian form of the tied variety--if I've understood you correctly. There's no bondage, as you said, but it can't rightly be called playful, either. It's predicated more on the concept of mutual pleasure rather than power exchange.
Not unprecedented at all--if, of course, I've grokked you.

 

[kopfhorer1]

.... Personally, my favorite to give and recieve are the playful type as opposed to the sexual/sensual type. Nothing wrong with a bit of diversity :super_hap

~K

Thank you. I'm glad to find someone else who thinks so! Gets kind of lonely out there when you think you're the only one!

 

[kopfhorer1]

....You raise a very good question, though, kopfhorer. Not the one about whether you belong or not, for most surely you do!

Thank you!

One of the things that I find so fascinating about tickling is the wide variance displayed within the "community" at large.

Won't you please clarify?

 

[kopfhorer1]

I think what you're into is a more egalitarian form of the tied variety--if I've understood you correctly. There's no bondage, as you said, but it can't rightly be called playful, either. It's predicated more on the concept of mutual pleasure rather than power exchange.
Not unprecedented at all--if, of course, I've grokked you.

July 27 '07 - I just re-read what you said. Yes, it is about mutual pleasure rather than power exchange.

I've never met a ticklish partner (as an adult anyhow) who liked being tickled. Most women I've known seem to want to avoid being tickled like poison ivy!

AFAIC, playfulness and pleasure are next-door neighbors!

 

[Kittamaru1]

I think you finally described how I've always felt... it's a very close, personal experience, but it isn't sexual in itself.

 

[kopfhorer1]

I'm glad to meet someone who agrees. Do you mind if I ask how your own "tickle life" has stacked up?

 

[Dr. Bill Kobb]

Won't you please clarify?

Well, I was referring to the seemingly endless triggers and variations on the theme. As opposed to, say, a spanking fetish, where there's only a handful(sorry!) of variations, tickling seems to have myriad variations. Some like it clothed, some nude. Some with sex, some as sheer playful communication. Some with bondage, others without. Some as part of their foot-fetish, others who aren't into feet in that way. And so on and on... :happy:

 

[kopfhorer1]

That makes a lot of sense. There's a lot more to physical relationships (sexual or not) than our popular media would have us believe.