Does tickling count as torture under the Geneva Conventions?

Does tickling count as torture under the Geneva Conventions?
Like what if the Ukrainians held down a vatnik and went "coochie coochie coo" and made him laugh until he cried and spilled the beans?
Genuine honest question, not even a troll. You're not physically harming him, and I'm not sure if tickling counts as psychological harm, so would it be okay under international law?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    tickling isn't particularly painful so i doubt the vatnik would even budge
    it's arguably pleasant

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      There are people who would rather have their nails pulled than be tickled.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        I'm an extremely ticklish person, and those people are moronic.

  2. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >The United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) provides the most precise and widely-cited definition of torture under international law. It defines torture as: any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.
    i guess it'd be torture if you could prove that severe mental suffering happened as a result of the tickling.
    if you did something like strapping someone to a table and tickling them for hours on end, though, that would definitely be torture.
    this is of course assuming that international courts are fair. it would definitely be considered torture if saddam did it, but it would absolutely not be considered torture if belgium did it.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >It would definitely be considered torture if saddam did it, but it would absolutely not be considered torture if belgium did it.
      I see no issue.
      Now, where's my water bucket?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      What about only giving them cute frilly dresses to wear. Would that violate the Geneva Conventions at all?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >Clothing, underwear and footwear shall be supplied to prisoners of war in sufficient quantities by the Detaining Power, which shall make allowance for the climate of the region where the prisoners are detained. Uniforms of enemy armed forces captured by the Detaining Power should, if suitable for the climate, be made available to clothe prisoners of war.
        This doesn't necessarily restrict clothing

        >The Detaining Power shall assemble prisoners of war in camps or camp compounds according to their nationality, language and customs, provided that such prisoners shall not be separated from prisoners of war belonging to the armed forces with which they were serving at the time of their capture, except with their consent.
        I'd argue this does. Unless, to be blunt, the PoW is into it.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        There's also

        >Prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated.

        and

        >Prisoners of war are entitled in all circumstances to respect for their persons and their honour.

        >Women shall be treated with all the regard due to their sex and shall in all cases benefit by treatment as favourable as that granted to men.

        >Prisoners of war shall retain the full civil capacity which they enjoyed at the time of their capture. The Detaining Power may not restrict the exercise, either within or without its own territory, of the rights such capacity confers except in so far as the captivity requires.

        So yeah, like honestly let's say you were a PoW. You'd be entitled to adequate clothing etc, would be able to wear your military uniform, but if you requested girls clothes, the granting or wearing of the clothes wasn't intended to cause you discrimination/harm, and you honestly wanted to do it, no issue.

        But granting only dresses? No. You'd have to have an option of mens or womens clothing.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          So what if they get to keep their uniforms, with the only other clothes provided being cute frilly dresses?

          >of the clothes wasn't intended to cause you discrimination/harm
          Alright, so there might be some light teasing involved, but nothing past that.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            You'd have to provide them with appropriate clothing for any activities they might do, and that includes sporting clothing so no skimpy volleyball dresses.

            That being said, again, if you just put the cute schoolgirl clothing next to the ordinary black/white mens and womens PoWs uniforms and didn't do anything to anyone who picked them, I think that's solidly in the court of "a military/humanitarian lawyer would have to figure it out".

            Another thing to keep in mind is the possibility that anyone investigating might not like your *desire* to have the PoWs in frilly dresses. For an example, I don't think anyone would get angry if the US Army provided e-thot clothing to a male PoW from the PRC. I think that's a solid example of something that isn't necessarily discriminatory or required (it might be different if it was a trans person for instance, in this case we're just discussing crossdressers) I think they *would* get angry if it turned out that the officer who approved that clothing had 3 TB of trans asian porn and openly talked about feminizing all asians.

            This is seriously a thing you might want to send an anonymous email to someone from the red cross about. I'd actually be interested to hear their interpretation.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >next to the ordinary black/white mens and womens PoWs uniforms
              Now what if the simplicity of dress sizing helps cut the cost vs traditional POW uniforms? Although I have a feeling you'd have to sacrifice on the cuteness to make that happen. This is an interesting dilemma.

              >This is seriously a thing you might want to send an anonymous email to someone from the red cross about. I'd actually be interested to hear their interpretation.
              Do they actually have someone there to answer questions like this?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Now what if the simplicity of dress sizing helps cut the cost vs traditional POW uniforms?
                Dress sizes aren't simple anon, remember you're dealing with actual prisoners of war. You're going to have to have a dress that works with everyone, and that's going to require a significant range. And no, a program of "slimming down" the bigger guys isn't going to cut it outside of basic, reasonable restrictions. Your 220 lb 6'5" SAW gunner isn't going to be slimmed down to 160 lb and given a dress.

                >Although I have a feeling you'd have to sacrifice on the cuteness to make that happen
                Yeah same. I mean if you made them to order that might work.

                >Do they actually have someone there to answer questions like this?
                I presume not, but if you shot an email to them and were able to convince them you were serious I don't see any reason why someone couldn't answer your question. I mean as much as you're coming at it from a fetish standpoint (and yes it is kinda hot, as a fetish) I could see some fricked up PoW camp commander trying to do it IRL.

  3. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Probably yes.

  4. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Get out of my head I was thinking about this while you posted it

  5. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    is that you Lee Goldson?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      I haven't heard that name in years...

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        he still prowls

        [...]

  6. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Did the thread on PrepHole turn you on so much you had to come here to share it with your buddies?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      No the thread on PrepHole made me think and I wanted to check.

  7. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Wtf I'm hard now???

  8. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Depending on the circumstances most definitely.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >Not using Whoops! Can't show that in a Christian manga!

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        PITA to edit on shitty phone editors.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/DARlHgB.jpg

      PITA to edit on shitty phone editors.

      Jesus Christ how fricking mentally ill do you have to be to draw/enjoy degen shit like this

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Very.
        >t. knower

  9. 1 year ago
    Anonymous
  10. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I don't really care either way honestly, I just wanted to say that you've captured my attention with this image.

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *