why isn't there more f/m tickling out there

[elaah]

I just wanted to add a woman's prespective to this thread.


Frankly, I think it's quite a treat when a guy will allow himself to be tickled by a woman or women at one of our gatherings. It's a rare occurrence indeed and very much appreciated. Hopefully more of the guys will allow us ladies to indulge ourselves. We don't video those scenes but they're sure imbedded in our memory! LOL

Jan

Adding another womans perspective......

I think that is wonderful that the gatherings you attend make you feel great when someone allows you to tickle them because they know you love it...

But I guess I feel differently because knowing so many people here 'settle' (maybe not the right word, but feel free to substitute)in their real life relationships. To me it is so much different than the person loving what you do to them because THEY love it. There are so many men and women here that post that do not get what they crave from their R/L relationship, whether married or bf / gf status, and that is why they come here to share to learn and hopefully meet someone that does. I would rather create the reaction knowing it was loved and build on it until the end, that is all. (still trying to think of what the end would be, LOL) The look of those baby blues staring at you, when they can open their eyes that is, lol is priceless when you know they love/hate it. lol

What do others think? I would be interested to know if you would rather tickle someone that gives you what you want or loves what you do to them....just curious.....

Always asking more questions lol

~Donna

 

[CitY of MicA]

can anyone spot me the 2 cents?

As one of my minor contributions to this forum, I collect mainstream pictures off the internet and post them in the images section. All the pictures I post are /f because, selfishly, that's all that interests me. However, if I know that people are interested in /m pictures, I can surely collect and post those, too.

I'm guessing that most males are turned off by /m material partially because they have no interest in being ticklees. Viewing said material may force you to deal with the uncomfortable idea of being tickled rather than being the tickler.

 

[TicklingIsLife]

This is such a complicated topic 😛 😀

 

[elaah]

thank you Ayla....

I am glad you liked it. Sometimes I just can't read and move on.. I want to stop, digest and reply....

ya know? lol,
Donna

 

[Kunzite]

I don't think that this phenomenon is isolated to the tickling community. I recall reading an article stating that the country's largest producer of "adult" computer games carried nothing for heterosexual women.

It probably has something to do with the fact that women do not develop full-blown sexual fetishes; only men do. As such, there is less of a call for "non-traditional" female-oriented material as there is for male-oriented.

That's not to say there isn't any; as people before me have said, many women are vocal on this dearth in the community and are affecting a change. I expect this state of affairs to be much bettered in the next few years.

 

[Krokus]

Yuck

I hate anything /m.......Im sorry, but if you are a guy and you like to see other men get tickled.....your fruity......not that I have anything against gay people......(God, lets not get into that again...)

 

[Cosmo_ac]

M/m tickling and f/m tickling

well, i've decided to add my opinion on this topic. first off, i have to say i'm disapointed with the way you feel Krokus. I know many people feel as tickling is sexual for them. I have no problem with that, but PLEASE people, remember, tickling isn't sexual for everybody. It doesn't have to be sexual. i mean, think about it. If tickling is always sexual, then if you tickle your brother or sister, does that mean you have incestious thoughts?
Anyway though, onto the f/m tickling topic. i have few theories why there isn't much of this. my first theory. Men don't like to show there ticklish, because of woman (i don't mean that in a negative way). let me explain this. Men, on average, like to come off as macho and strong. We do this to attract the attention of woman. When we are tickled, this tends to disolve the macho appearence as we are reduced to helpless laughter. Woman, not all woman, but some, find this very unappealing. To qoute one woman i was chatting to about the subject "I have a rule, never f@%# a ticklish guy". Now, this was a disturbing thought. Mainly because, if one person thinks like this, then i know others do also.
Another theory is that woman just seem to prefer the Lee role. out of a good deal of woman i've chatted with on the forum, most prefer the Lee role. I'm not sure why that is, they just do.
One more reason, is the male/female ratio on this forum. Simply put, the guys seriously outnumber the woman. Now, this really, isn't anybody's fault, this is just how things worked out. But, the Females should become more active in the Forum. I know there are a few females who post regulerly, but there aren't really that many. I was chatting with one lady who told me she had several female friends who were into tickling but, they rather stay in the shadows, because the board was too male Dominant. That's fair, i can understand that. Only, here's the thing. If woman would like to have the board become more even, they can't hide in the shadows. They have to get out there and say "we're here!" and make there pressence known.
Well, that's it. I think i've said everything i wanted too.

 

[evilqueen]

QB, elaah, ayla and other ladies posting here: agree with you all. Women tend to be more private, and to prefer written smut to visual smut.

Kunzite: if women don't develop full-blown fetishes, then what am I doing with all this - stuff? *gesturing towards spare bedroom filled with restraints, toys and porn*😉

For me, tickling is sexual and I don't engage in it with anyone who isn't an actual/potential sexual partner. But because it's sexual, I like stories and such where the victim is sexually tormented by tickling. I've seen this in m/f and f/f videos, but not any in which the victim is male, though I'm aware of m/m videos that show the full effects of tickling. IMHO, since (I believe) it makes straight guys uncomfortable to see other guys aroused, and since that's often the goal of a guy into f/m tickling, to be aroused, that dichotomy might explain the lack of f/m visual material. I think.

 

[Kunzite]

Kunzite: if women don't develop full-blown fetishes, then what am I doing with all this - stuff? *gesturing towards spare bedroom filled with restraints, toys and porn*😉

Heh heh, that's quite an image, I must admit. Technically, though, anything a woman develops is a "preference" or "interest" or the like. I think I would extend to describing what you have, evilqueen, as "A fantastic display of enviably good taste" 🙂

The technical definition of a fetish is a sort of dysfunction, applying to people who can't lead normal lives as a result of their sexual preferences. For formative reasons, only men can develop them. Although this is not the way we normally use the word, it does color people's perception of fetish material.

 

[dvnc]

Re: Yuck

I hate anything /m.......Im sorry, but if you are a guy and you like to see other men get tickled.....your fruity......not that I have anything against gay people......(God, lets not get into that again...)

Krokus, your logic escaped, brother. Ran off. If a guy LIKES a WOMAN to tickle him, that's a form of /m tickling. If he watched a video of such f/m tickling, picturing HE was the 'lee, much the same as when I watch a video of anyone tickling a woman, wishin' I was the 'ler.

Let's pass over the negativity towards homosexuality, for the moment. What? Don't understand me? Ask anyone who has a propensity for those of their gender how they feel about the term "fruity". It's not considered nice, kind, or friendly.

I do respect you for giving your perspective. You represent a faction of men and women here. Not all of them, mind you, but a faction. Not all the folks runnin' this board are against /m. Indeed, I could swear that Mistress Mia used to tickle a variety of men before settling down to marriage. Is she "fruity"? Are ya, Mia?

I'm guessing you didn't mean this to sound as it does. I'd like to believe that. If not, at least you've declared yourself boldly.

dvnc

 

[dvnc]

Heh heh, that's quite an image, I must admit. Technically, though, anything a woman develops is a "preference" or "interest" or the like. I think I would extend to describing what you have, evilqueen, as "A fantastic display of enviably good taste" 🙂

The technical definition of a fetish is a sort of dysfunction, applying to people who can't lead normal lives as a result of their sexual preferences. For formative reasons, only men can develop them. Although this is not the way we normally use the word, it does color people's perception of fetish material.

Huh? What technical? Sir, I refute some of your statement. This means I disagree, but don't wish to say bad things about you. I just have different data.

You can check the dictionary here:
http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=fetish

From there, see also paraphilia.

If you mean, according to psychological reference, like, say, the DSM-IV, we're a fetish, that would still be inaccurate. We, meaning those into tickling, fall into a paraphilia or a sexual deviation, or a deviancy in general, when focused consentually.

Fetishes are object-related, not activity-related. For instance, a foot as a favored object would be a foot fetish. Tickling is an action, though, not an object. This kink does combine with others, such as foot fetishes and other body part focuses, as well as bondage, dominance and submission, and sado-machocism.

Fetishes are not always sexual. For instance, some folks have fetishes about the cleanliness of the area around them. They get exited when it's NOT clean, but their excitement is a negative. The object is the clean space or tidy room.

Women are not beyond fetishes, according to the psychology field of today. The DSM-IV doesn't exclude them. Clearly, though, there are less found than men, in THIS interest. I beleive it mentions such, but don't recall where that's quoted.

If you've information that refutes this, do mail me. I've been trackin' this for years, and have an interest in it. I dig knowin' this data, 'cause anyone havin' issues with my kink always starts with the mention of "fetish" and you can watch 'em blink when you come back with the simple truth - those of us who play consentually are deviants, and our deviancy is our interest or fascination with tickling or being tickled.

dvnc*
* who didn't like the psych degree enough to complete it. Just wanted t'know 'bout the kink...

 

[Myriads]

For instance, a foot as a favored object would be a foot fetish.

Actully this would be a partialism. When a fetish falls upon a body part it falls into this new catagory. 🙂 Outside of clinical situations few use it though.

Also recently fetishism has been on the rise in females in the just turned 20 generation. A larger and larger number are showing the same tendencies that seemed to be mostly confined to males in previous decades. Lots of interesting speculations on why this is. Most center on the web and it's ability to empower women to explore their sexualities without realworld risks.

Myriads

 

[CitY of MicA]

You are correct, dvnc. While I don't have a quote from a Psychology book handy, they refer to fetishes as occuring much more commonly in males but still existant in some females. Even books from 20 years ago do not exclude females from fetishism.

 

[Kunzite]

Well, dvnc, thanks for bringing this to my attention. You're right, fetishes aren't always sexual, I just took it for granted we were talking about sexual fetishes.

I must disagree with your statement that fetishes are object- and not activity-related, however. By all psychological accounts, flashers are fetishists, and psychologists treat them as such.

The strict clinical definiton (used by psychologists who specialize in curing fetishes) of a sexual fetish is, as I recall, an
object or activity which meets BOTH of the following criteria:

1.) Fetish object must be present for sexual arousal of any kind to occur (i.e. If you are capable of being aroused without thinking of the object, partatking in the activity, or whichever, you do not have a fetish)

2.) Pursuit of this object, activity, etc. causes mental anguish to the subject or people around the subject (i.e. If you are happy with yourself, and so is everyone you know, you do not have a fetish)

This is, as I said, considerably stricter than the everyday definition, which the dictionary link describes. I think psychologists define it this way because, let's face it, if it can't be classified as a sickness they have no interest in it 🙂

A fetish by this definition that I have put forth occurs only in males, because fetishes invariably develop during early masturbatory behavior during puberty. As a result, males probably tend to be more strongly dependant on "fetish-like" material than females.

However, lest we stray too far and fail to see the forest for the trees, I must stress that everyone is different, and not everyone who enjoys tickling must be classified thusly. However, it is the proliferation of these ideas about fetishism which I think is responsible for the prodominantly male-orientedness of much material. But remember, everyone is an individual, and wide-sweeping descriptions of the entire community are bound to fail.

And speaking of not seeing the forest for the trees, I'm aware that there are multiple definitions of "fetish"; we've already heard two. Let's not get bogged down by arguing trivia. I just offered this definition to share a few thoughts on why things might be the way they are.

Cheers,
Kunzite

 

[Krokus]

Ok

Let me clarify what I really meant. I can see now that I made a mistake, so let me put it this way: I personally do not like anything /m. . . .that does not mean I think it is wrong. Its just not my cup of tea.

Peace- Krokus

 

[elaah]

aahhhhh....

A fetish by this definition that I have put forth occurs only in males, because fetishes invariably develop during early masturbatory behavior during puberty. As a result, males probably tend to be more strongly dependant on "fetish-like" material than females.

Cheers,
Kunzite

aah....Now I see. The "girls" of the forum learned all this from you "boys" .... since you are the ones that had a corner on masturbation growing up...lol.. What do you say EQ, Mia, Ayla... we just round them all up and tickle them and tell them it isn't so! Maybe on a stainless restaurant prep table that is cold and makes them giggle just as they let their bare backs relax and touch the cold metal? lol Got any duct tape,Mia?

 

[Kunzite]

Re: aahhhhh....

aah....Now I see. The "girls" of the forum learned all this from you "boys" .... since you are the ones that had a corner on masturbation growing up...lol..

Heh heh, not at all. The pubescent boys are simply the ones more likely to develop neuroses. You might say that women take charge of their preferences, and have considerably more control then we men often do 🙂

 

[Myriads]

because fetishes invariably develop during early masturbatory behavior during puberty. As a result, males probably tend to be more strongly dependant on "fetish-like" material than females.

This is the historic argument that psychologists once used to try and answer why males once formed the majority of fetishists. And in a time when women were less apt to describe their fantasies, or even admit that they masturbated at all, it was not a bad conclusion to come to. But alas, they were using bad data.

But the majority of women DO masturbate frequently in puberty, and fantisize pretty regularily while doing so. So many of the same chances at fetish formation exist for them. The difference is the focus of their fantasies. Female fantasies tend to be more situational then object oriented (having things done to them or doing things) then men's, which trend toward objectification, partialism, and item orientation/involvement (suspected to be caused by random connections formed in moments of surprise arousal in puberty (why? men can go from zero to sixty in physical arousal, so their chances of random encounters with random objects/situations while aroused are greater)) So women, while less apt to get some fetish groups are still open to many of them in very high numbers, and modern data is starting to show this.

And for the sake of all our minds here is how I'm using the term 'fetish'.

Fetish: A item, situation, or environment that produces a difinitive state of sexual arousal (including the emotional/mental side, perhaps alone) and/or physical excietment. Taken to an extreme, when only this item/situation/environment can cause arousal, the fetish becomes a sexual disfunction rather then a strong preference.

Note under my definition the average American male has a breast fetish (partialism) since it's just considered Ok by the majority society standard, its not concidered odd. 🙂

Having fun expanding the discussion.

Myriads

 

[kurchatovium]

Another 2 cents? I must be up to $1.20 by now.

Tickling is a sexual thing for me too and I am straight by the way. However when a man looks at a video he usually is imagining himself in the man's role. So if I watch a f/m video I imagine I'm the guy getting tickled. To me I don't care if the guy gets aroused or not I barely notice he is there. I am looking at the lady doing the tickling: is she really into it?, does she use lots of tickle taunts? Is she sexy? Is she dressed sexy? If all those things are true then yes I love the video and find it erotic. Sadly many f/m videos fail many of those criteria and in part thats why they may not sell well for men.

Glad to hear that fetishism is on the rise in women because that means more potential tickle partners for all us guys. I think the internet might well be the reason, I know its helped me break out of my shell. Of course that means you are all stuck with me 🙂

Finally its OK not to like f/m or f/f or m/f or m/m or any collection of the four. We are all different. I think its just the way were wired. 🙂

 

[Myriads]

Glad to hear that fetishism is on the rise in women because that means more potential tickle partners for all us guys. I think the internet might well be the reason, I know its helped me break out of my shell.

Indeed the web is seen as one of the reasons for this. There is a lot of argument as to why. But many think it has to do with the communal nature of the web, and how it allows people to explore personal sexual arousal foci in relative safety. This allows greater comfort levels to form earlier and a more varied sexual identitiy to emerge.

Myriads

 

[dvnc]

Wow. Cool thread. Props all 'round.

Where t'start? Hmm...

Myriads - thanks for savin' me a lot of typin'. You've better writin', sir.

Kunzite - a) what Myriads said and b) I was quotin' the DSM-IV, which is the psych tome used to "officially" describe such things. It's available in bookstores, and at local libraries, and is actually interestin', if you're into this, and it seems y'are. If y'd be so kind as to post or mail me your sources, I'd dig readin' from your perpective, without tirin' ya with my dopey questions. The term "fetish" has way too many conflictin' meanings now. That's why I stick to deviancy, hence the name.

Krokus - I respect ya all the more, sir.

Elaah - I'm almost wishin' Myriads DIDN'T clarify this, 'cause it looked like you were about t'get amusin'. Wait. You masturbated? 😉 Why, I'm just here t'be abused by Q.

Fine info. Thanks, all!

dvnc

 

[Kunzite]

Kunzite - If y'd be so kind as to post or mail me your sources, I'd dig readin' from your perpective, without tirin' ya with my dopey questions. The term "fetish" has way too many conflictin' meanings now. That's why I stick to deviancy, hence the name.

I'm afraid I don't have a book on hand to quote, and in fact it has been a while, so I must admit Myriads could be right, I could be quoting from an obsolete book. What I think is most likely is that my definition of "fetish" is far too negative and has become outdated and replaced with a more comprehensive one, which obviously applies to more people.

Essentially, I do believe we have evidence that the most intense forms of sexual monomania (there I go, using nineteeth century psychological terms again 🙂 ) are uniquely male. I think it's because impotence, characteristic of these neuroses, is also uniquely male. But hey, I could be wrong there too.

But like I said, anything less than that is open to both sexes, and thank god it is. I'm sure we all appreciate these lovely ladies who have voiced their opinions on the subject 🙂

Thanks,
Kunzite

 

[Myriads]

Good discussion Kunzite,

The main problem with the word fetish is that is has become debased in popular usage. Most folks will use it in the most general sense now (as in any unusual sexual like) I think most debate is caused by that fact.

Monomania is a good term, though I've not heard it for a bit 🙂 ocd seems to have replaced it 🙂

Later,
Myriads

 

[MadKalnod]

Most of my favorite real-life tickling experiences have been f/m with me as the 'lee, or even a "tickle fight" with the lady and I tickling each other simultaneously. It certainly isn't that I don't enjoy the concept. However, I'm not really as interested in seeing f/m material as I am in seeing */f material. This is mainly due to the fact that I have difficulty visualizing myself in the role of the average male adult video actor in that situation. (Unless he also looks just like Silent Bob, in which case that's a whole other can of skeeviness... ) Since my real-life experiences are so rare, why would I want to watch some other guy who's getting paid to take part in the activity that I've been forced to live without forthree months now? Yeah buddy, thanks for reminding me just what I'm missing...

My response on the "Why F/F?" thread is also relevant here.

 

[buckeyeguy]

Lack of male 'lees for filming

Haven't read through this entire long thread, so pardon me if I'm repeating something, but I've always sought out F/m stuff, not just in tickling, but other things as well. I don't get jealous of the guy in the vid, I just pretend it's me on screen, and think what it must feel like.

Now when you think about the F/f vids, all the women look great... how does a movie maker get great looking guys to be on the bottom? Probably only ones that need money, or are really into it, and then that doesn't necessarily equate to looks. I'm thinking 'Ron Jeremy' here (who, if I'm not mistaken, I've actually see in a tickle video... will have to check my tapes 😎

Anyway, more F/m stuff please...