It'd be nice to get back on topic.
It never went off topic. You stated you didn’t understand how we got to a certain point. But the points had to do with alternative love languages and how the original 5 languages were ideas or models and you became lost by your own admission.
Example: I had a client aggressively asking me to “love him” and “show him love”. Things got very inappropriate and scary, very fast.
I am sorry you experienced that and no one should have to be put into a situation where they feel threatened. Talking about the distortion of the word love!
Next time someone says that reply, “show me entitlement” and then hold a mirror up to him.
I haven't read this book but the main question for me would be: Is there anything in particular described in the book that attempts to single out another group or attack them? If the only thing I did was read the book without knowing about the author, would the advice be applicable to anyone?
I'm not big on judging an author because of what they believe outside of their literature.
I also don't feel that any author has an added burden of making sure that the special case of every subgroup is taken into consideration.
@jplemmon the problem with the concept of trying to separate the artist from the art (or the author from the literature as it were) is several fold:
when you consume the creator's content, are you financially supporting them and therefore financially supporting when they spend their money to support their views? If you buy an author's book and they are using proceeds of the sales to fund political campaigns, companies, and non-profits that support their views, you are in effect financially backing their beliefs whether you agree with them or not. Or say if a creator has been enabled to behave in irresponsible, harmful ways because of the money and fame they have gained off the sales of their content - the people continuing to consume their content are financially giving them the ok to continue.
when people continue to discuss and support a creator's ideas without giving full context, then the people who learn about the creator through them will tend to continue the cycle. It in effect creates a "well they are talented/famous, so who cares?" dynamic that is extremely dangerous as it means they have no accountability for any harm they do. A quick look at people such as Harvey Weinstein and Bill Cosby shows how power and money can allow a creator's personal views to cause lasting damage over decades. There are still people who will not believe either of them did anything wrong even though both have been convicted of sexual misconduct.
art/literature/creativity does not come from nowhere - it is informed by our experiences and beliefs, and so trying to 100% separate a creator from their creation is unrealistic at best. In a case like the 5 love languages book, where the concept/system and indeed entire book is centered around the person's personal beliefs and experiences rather than fiction, it's even less possible to separate.
It is possible to ethically consume content and to discuss that content critically. For instance, if you do not support an author's political views and know they use their money to support politically driven measures you do not agree with, you can always obtain their work second hand. That way you can still be fully informed about their work in order to discuss it and its context without financially supporting their politics. Similarly, when you find out an author you enjoy has done harmful things you disagree with, you can still enjoy their work but when you discuss it with others make sure to also mention and discuss the context of the author's behavior.
@TxTom
And how does a conversation about something as innocuous and lighthearted as love language, an emotional connection between any people, nose dive into the grievances of religious patriarchy, "problematic" biases, agendas, and misinformation?
Because many of us recognize that a "love language" discussion is NOT neither innocuous, nor lighthearted. You even admit it "nosedived" here.
You have dug your heels in on this topic, which means it's not lighthearted for you.
Whether or not you believe or acknowledge it, there's an inherent danger I, and others here, put ourselves in by engaging in such an intimate topic/conversation with a fellow cuddler. Instead, we choose to say NO.
@starrynitecuds
...many of us recognize that a "love language" discussion is NOT neither innocuous, nor lighthearted... You have dug your heels in on this topic...
May I surmise by your statement that you have done the same?
Regardless, I consider communication in any relationship to be an integral part of the relationship itself.
However, I consider an online discussion between (mostly) strangers about the subject to be lighthearded, until it unnecessarily devolves into rants about -ists and -isms.
Interpret that however you wish.
@TxTom Yes, I am. But unlike you, I never said the topic was lighthearted or innocuous. It's serious because it can easily be misinterpreted or overstepping boundaries. I agreed with @bobadevotee , it's not appropriate to discuss with platonic cuddling.
It's noteworthy that you conveniently sidestep the danger aspect that has been mentioned.
@TxTom I think there is starting to be a schism between you and some strangers. Am I allowed to use that term, or does that make me a separatist?
Who needs love language when you can simply bring a good bottle of red wine?
(you people are being way too serious lately )
...it's not appropriate to discuss with platonic cuddling...
Hence the title of the thread.
So let's get back to that discussion, instead of derailing the topic with unrelated matters. I was rather interested in reading what other had to say about this.
@Sooson - They need to work on their opening and mid game? lol
@Minestrone101 Haha I would say so!!!
@Sooson Check this combo from Anatomy Karprov. Chess is my love language.
I have an example of a platonic use of love languages. For me, receiving gifts has almost no value. I could probably never receive another gift in my life and I would be OK. On the other hand, gift giving is really meaningful to my 17 year old daughter. We both know these things, so how did she navigate that this past Christmas? She elaborately wrapped up an empty box with a note inside that said: "I got you exactly what you wanted." It was literally one of the best "gifts" I've ever received.
Can the concepts be applied to family, friends, coworkers, etc.? Sure, and I have certainly discussed it with platonic friends. Probably the most useful thing to take from it is just a reminder that we are all different and that we value different things.
Having said that, I'm not sure how useful love languages are in this community (other than the reminder that we're all different). Clearly, since we're here, physical touch is an important way to connect with someone, but I'm not sure how most of the other categories really apply.
I feel love languages are more appropriate for romantic relationships or at least established romantic relationships. I like gifts and acts or service more than physical touch (even though I'm on this site), however I don't think those things are appropriate for strangers who I'm meeting to cuddle. I kinda also like quality time, but that requires more of a connection. I have to really like someone to want to spend loads of quality time with them.
To answer the OP, without reading all that's been already said, because they are languages. It describes the way something is communicated. Nothing else should be inferred.
One of the big issues here is that people are seeing the word "love" and are automatically thinking romance because that is what our culture prioritizes overall. Would it help some of y'all if you replaced the word "love" with "affection" or "appreciation"?
In the LGBTQ+ community, for instance, many of us have shifted our relationship priorities to stop devaluing platonic relationships in favor of romantic ones. People who are asexual/aromantic, polyamorous, or relationship anarchists may have long term friendships that are more intimate and longer lasting than their romantic partners. A lot of people outside the community also value these platonic bonds, but because of social conditioning they rarely consider how language choice informs thought patterns regarding those relationships.
In any longer term relationship, even professional ones, there needs to be a balance of needs being met for both individuals to be fulfilled and for the relationship to be healthy and lasting. When needs aren't being met and communication breaks down, the relationship tends to fall apart and resentment grows or worse. At our core we all desire to feel appreciated, needed, and cared for and thus all the love/affection/appreciation languages are is a language tool to help us express our needs within the context of our relationships. Without said tools, people tend to just assume that everyone's needs are the same as their own....and so things break down.
This is why the 5 languages model as written and understood by the general population fails. Sure, it can be a great gateway for some people into the concept of communicating emotional needs, but it focuses solely on romantic love, further devalues all other types of relationships, and reinforces problematic mindsets from the past that do not serve a large portion of the population for most of their relationships in everyday life. Simply put, the 5 just doesn't go far enough so it's like only learning ABC of the alphabet and then trying to write a letter to someone.
For the purposes of cuddling, sure, it's unlikely that for a one-off cuddle that the topic of love languages will need to come up. But for longer term pairings it'd be a good idea to at least discuss how to help each other feel appreciated/loved. After all, that feeling of acceptance and affection is a large part of why people seek out platonic cuddling in the first place. For pros, I think if the client brings it up it can be a teachable moment and a time to set and enforce boundaries. And just like with any boundaries, if the client crosses the line then consequences ensue.
GOODNESS!!!! So much is happening and so much that I want to respond to. I am still reading... Its just going to take a minute...
I love it. I LOVE all of it... So much goodness in all of the info presented. Thank you all for sharing your thoughts.
😊
There was a lot of tension and heat with this discussion and I'm glad to have given it a moment to marinate.
I was just chatting with a beautiful human from the site and was thinking that maybe.... JUST MAYBE.... we are all here on behalf of the touch yes, but I'm not sure about this CLEARLY from @Achterbahn and I suppose that's why there is so much discussion about it. (Unless its not your thing and you're the type to think we are making this tooooooooo complex. which is totally fine as well! 😂😂😂)
@Achterbahn
Clearly, since we're here, physical touch is an important way to connect with someone, but I'm not sure how most of the other categories really apply.
For example, I feel very honored when someone is willing to take time out of their life to share it with me. For a cup of coffee. For a cuddle. For help with a project. The TOUCH that comes with platonic cuddling is not the actual part that fills my soul and creates a life-sustaining connection. Its the time spent. Its the calendaring. Its the commitment to the plan and the discussion of the boundaries. FAR MORE than the touch. I know I am only speaking about my experience, but I also know people come to this community for a MILLION different reasons.
It was also mentioned
that feeling of acceptance and affection is a large part of why people seek out platonic cuddling in the first place.
I think touch IS something we all need for survival. Some people come here because they long for touch more than anything else to feel connected to another human being, but I think there is MORE SUBSTANCE that everyone talks about.... in their profiles, in the forums, with each other while they're cuddling or getting to know each other.....
No matter how we communicate best or feel kindness from another person, maybe the bottom line is we are all looking to find connection in someone's heart/soul. Even just for a moment. And leave each other with hearts unbroken.
MAYBE that is why certain people can never feel comfortable with someone to cuddle unless they feel like they are seen. Like they are accepted. MAYBE that is a different word and a different REASON that can clarify what some of us are looking for more than JUST the hugs?
@cuddlefaery I appreciate that you take so much time to be aware of the world AROUND you and not just YOUR world only. I am also grateful that you provide other people the opportunity to learn about being more sensitive to the fact that we are all different and there is no "one right way" to do things.
I'm going to spoil this because I do want to get back to the topic, but it is pertinent to say how much I agree with people who don't want to hold onto an author or a director or influencial person when said person has done hurtful things to others because of a lack of kindness. THIS is why I want to take the idea of relational communication and add to it all of the other different aspects.
@cuddlefaery Thank you again for sharing this. I put the Weinstein stuff in here just for ease of reference. Pulp Fiction/Shakespeare in Love are some of our families most enjoyable movies but its this kind of AWARENESS that makes it so I wouldn't recommend them to people without the asterisk of Harvey Weinstein being a convicted sex offender. Same with Pay it Forward I just love the concept of that movie. I use it in many different references probably at least once a week. But... its done with an asterisk, Kevin Spacey.... at least 20 people came forward to speak about his inappropriate advances towards young boys/men. This doesn't change that the IDEA of Pay It Forward was super cool, but I don't want to support him as an actor anymore so I don't want to give him too much credit for his role in the move. Harvey Weinstein (/ˈwaɪnstiːn/; born March 19, 1952) is an American former film producer and convicted sex offender. In 1979, Weinstein and his brother, Bob Weinstein, co-founded the entertainment company Miramax, which produced several successful independent films including Sex, Lies, and Videotape (1989); The Crying Game (1992); Pulp Fiction (1994); Heavenly Creatures (1994); Flirting with Disaster (1996); and Shakespeare in Love (1998).[5] Weinstein won an Academy Award for producing Shakespeare in Love and also won seven Tony Awards for plays and musicals including The Producers, Billy Elliot the Musical, and August: Osage County.[6] After leaving Miramax, Weinstein and his brother Bob founded The Weinstein Company (TWC), a mini-major film studio. He was co-chairman, alongside Bob, from 2005 to 2017. In October 2017, following sexual abuse allegations dating back to the late 1970s, Weinstein was dismissed from his company and expelled from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. More than 80 women made allegations of sexual harassment or rape against Weinstein by October 31.[7] The allegations sparked the #MeToo social media campaign and subsequent sexual abuse allegations against many powerful men around the world; this phenomenon is referred to as the "Weinstein effect". In May 2018, Weinstein was arrested and charged with rape in New York and then in February 2020, he was found guilty of two of five felony counts.[8] Weinstein was sentenced to 23 years in prison,[9] and began serving his sentence at Wende Correctional Facility. On July 20, 2021, he was extradited to Los Angeles to face further charges at a subsequent trial, where he was found guilty of three of seven charges on December 19, 2022.[10] He was sentenced to 16 years in the Los Angeles trial, and his California prison term must be served separately from his New York sentence.[11]
Would love language would be the opposite of hate language?
@sillysassy great summation of the subject. I think it's difficult to communicate and understand fully these types of topics because of everyone's rigid understanding of words. I think we all hold a firm belief in what we know to be true that it limits our ability to actually understand the intent of what is being said. Words like platonic and love are such words. There can never be an all encompassing definition that is widely accepted by most because of our differing experiences and exposures. I think it's better for us (I'm speaking for myself ) to be more flexible and open to how others think in discussion rather than to be definitive to our limited knowledge.
@Achterbahn wrote: She elaborately wrapped up an empty box with a note inside that said: "I got you exactly what you wanted." It was literally one of the best "gifts" I've ever received.
That is beautiful indeed. 🥰
For me, "love" means a lot more than simply romance and I probably won't talk about "love language" toward my very close friends whom I do love non-romantically, but I certainly express my feelings toward them in ways that are my love language or-and in ways I know they enjoy too.
@sillysassy Clearly "clearly" was the wrong word... 😀
But it's a good illustration about why I try not to ever assume things about people. Even when there are things that one might feel are "obvious" (like people on a cuddling site assigning importance to physical touch), there are no things that are universally true about every member of a given group.
For the record, I agree with what you said. I look for much more substance in connections that I make with people here than just touch.
Whoa! Love languages are in reference to a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT "relationship" than cuddle buddies is supposed to be. Being that physical touch is one of them, I can see how it would be brought up, but I wouldn't be comfortable with someone after having said such. Expectations only rise from there and NOPE!!! Mine are quality time and words of affirmation, but I don't look to cuddle buddies to fill those needs (I'm rather closed of emotionally though..). I just need to "shut my head off" for a while...
@Achterbahn Clearly CLEARLY 😂 Thank you for what you said about not assuming. What a glorious freedom there is to be had in removing assumptions from the equation.
...there are no things that are universally true about every member of a given group.
Also, I love what you said in your profile.
I love connecting with people and learning about them. I enjoy connecting to people through touch.
@great_pillow08 you are certainly not the only one to have that reaction. hahahhaa @HarleyGirlKate
but I certainly express my feelings toward them in ways that are my love language or-and in ways I know they enjoy too.
These responses make me feel like a new terminology along the lines of "CONNECTION LANGUAGES" if a person knows about the IDEA of Love Languages aka THOUGHTFUL RELATIONAL/COMMUNICATION TOOLS, then we tend to connect with people instinctively to try and gain more traction relationally. The TRAUMA of dealing with boundary pushers, energy vampires, and anyone who wants to misappropriate the terminology seems to be the more problematic aspect. Hmmmmmm
@BashfulLoner Thank you for the kind words and your thoughtful intentions as always.
I think we all hold a firm belief in what we know to be true that it limits our ability to actually understand the intent of what is being said.
I think this is so true. Being open to the idea that someone's experience leads them to react to certain words and trying to navigate past that is challenging to be sure.
I think one of the best things I've learned in the last decade is that what I know is "Perfect for NOW" instead of trying to believe its the be all/end all. Being OPEN to others ideas or explanations gives me a better chance to understand and relate and also be honest enough to change my mind whenever its appropriate.
I love the interaction here. Thank you all for being mindful and kind even if we don't see it exactly the same way. Its fun to EXPLORE IDEAS together. 😊🌞💗
When @UCpaaHVg6u0 orginally started this thread, I think he hit on something VERY IMPORTANT. The reactions people have had in the meantime prove that he was spot on. I'm not looking for there to be one right answer, I brought this up again because of discussion around touch and the constancy shown that people seem to be looking for ACCEPTANCE, Non-Judgement, Respect, kindness, a feeling of being seen etc. not JUST touch. It feels like that's why there is so much emotion behind the connecting. I FEEL LIKE ITS BIGGER THAN JUST A HUG!!!
@UCpaaHVg6u0 originally started off with...
I see occasional mention of "love languages", which I don't really know about, but it sounded positive and life-affirming so I wikied it. The first thing it mentioned was that these skills/capacities are intended for romantically bonded couples. That's fine for that realm, but here it sounds risky. Being fuzzy about what platonic cuddling is, is probably not good for this place.
Seeing the painful situations that some have found themselves in, I think he was insightful in saying the below (my emphasis)
...we could certainly borrow things that are important... if they don't compromise the safety and platonic ideals of cuddlers.
Happy Thursday everyone. The wheels in my brain/heart are turning indeed. 😊