First of, I do understand that you're to my understanding respecting the rules and following them personally, even if you might not agree with it. Which is great.
"...they absolutely are free to run the site as they wish, and have and will continue to do so despite any forum discussions."
Yep.
"My point was that this issue is bigger than just this site, and how it is being handled is important on a societal scale. Discussions are important both for educational purposes and for any progress in the original problem to be made."
Okay... sure.
"And I did not state that the discussions need to happen here on this site - simply that I hope that people will continue having them."
You didn't explicitly say it and I didn't say you did. Though I think we can both agree that it was open to interpretation and left the door open for others to "continue the discussion"... here... until/"and hopefully if enough people get it going it'll eventually sink in."
"I do hope however that discussions on this will continue to be had, because I absolutely believe there's a better way to be going about this, and hopefully if enough people get talking it'll eventually sink in."
"I personally do not believe that constructive criticism should be viewed as pressure to change - that is not the point of constructive criticism. Whether or not one views this particular forum thread as that is another debate, however."
So... you'd see no issue with it, if a bunch of people told you not to do X as an individual or a business and when you started your freedom, desire, and/or reasoning to do X, they went on about it and ended with something like:
To me, it does come across as pressuring the site to change its rules, values, boundaries, or stance by continuing knowing their stance already, and especially trying to have others do so by making said statements. I don't think you'd appreciate that being done to you as an individual, or business. So that's where my objection with what you said comes from. Maybe you'll disagree with much of what I said, or you'll be able to see some value in what I shared. I'm also good with agreeing to disagree, if it comes down to that.
I do think that as an individual from what I've seen you're respectable of following the rules and have been so kind to many here. We just seem to see the current point in question differently and that's what I am talking about.
@Lovelight
I don't think you'd appreciate that being done to you as an individual, or business.
First, I differentiate between people and businesses - they are not interchangeable. If I did not believe they are separate entities, then the admin and mods stating that their personal views may differ from the site would be a bigger issue. Businesses, as non people, do not have boundaries - but the people running them can and do. I do not expect people to treat my business as a person and view critique of it as separate.
Maybe it's because I come from a performing arts background, but I am used to constructive criticism and constantly getting feedback on what other believe I can improve. Now, I can have personal boundaries about who I will discuss business policy with, when, etc., but that is changing my behavior as boundaries are not the same as rules. For instance, if I posted a dance video and it was getting a ton of negative criticism that I started to take personally and was taking a toll on my emotional and mental health, I absolutely can and would set a boundary for myself to stop reading those comments, stop engaging, etc. I would not try to impose my boundaries on the commenters as a rule - after all I posted the video publicly and thus opened the door for critique. I can choose what of the criticism I find valuable or not, I don't have to immediately internalize every negative comment as how I "should" be, but rather take them as the commenter's opinon as that is all that it is. I am the one who decides how much value that person's opinion is to me.
As for my comment about wanting discussion and progress to sink in,
I was not intentionally vague but speaking generally as I tend to do. I absolutely could have been more specific with my language and made it more clear that I meant discussion in general, not just on the site, and for that confusion I apologize.
For me, the whole point of a public forum, vs a private one with more restrictive rules and requirements, is open discussion of ideas and that means people are not always going to agree. If I wanted an echo chamber, I would participate in that rather than somewhere like here. I appreciate discussions like these that challenge me to think critically about my position in order to defend it, and I certainly do not expect everyone or anyone to agree with me - the value is in the discussion itself rather than in an instant outcome.
@cuddlefaery
"First, I differentiate between people and businesses - they are not interchangeable."
So do I, which is why I mentioned both. However, I think there's an overlap, at some point it can and does reach the people.
As a society, I don't believe we should operate as taking/not acknowledging the human aspect out of businesses, or workers, entirely by "differentiating it" so much that it is totally dehumanized, and by continuing to push, and push, and push until basically people get their way. Or that it potentially affects the individuals running it on such a personal level that they've to "stop reading the comments" like you said you'd do if it got to you.
"For instance, if I posted a dance video and it was getting a ton of negative criticism that I started to take personally and was taking a toll on my emotional and mental health, I absolutely can and would set a boundary for myself to stop reading those comments, stop engaging, etc."
Or have to take other drastic actions such as caving under pressure or having to shut down altogether. Businesses are part human, because humans are the back bone of said business. I don't think people and businesses' stances should be pushed so much to the point that it takes such a toll on them that they've to stop engaging or what have you after they've started their boundaries, rules, etc. I would also say that I don't think boundaries are exclusive to people and that businesses also have them. Plus, like I'd mentioned, I believe in acknowledging and being mindful of the human aspect of business, especially small businesses who may often be having a harder time trying to take care of their members, along with their own lives.
So in my viewpoint, as such, I believe there's a level of respect and consideration that is best to have for them. Hence if a business says "No" to doing or allowing certain things such as the point in question... on their platform, I believe it should be respected and not be challenged left and right after knowing their stance, plus they've explained, or especially leave the door open by having others continuing to do so...
"As for my comment about wanting discussion and progress to sink in, I was not intentionally vague but speaking generally as I tend to do. I absolutely could have been more specific with my language and made it more clear that I meant discussion in general, not just on the site, and for that confusion I apologize."
"Not just..." So are you saying to "you hope others continue to have said discussion elsewhere and hopefully it'll sink in" or are you leaving it open to interpretation still?
"...but I am used to constructive criticism and constantly getting feedback on what other believe I can improve."
I'm sure many can relate to that as individuals, and businesses. However, my concern is when something turns from constructive criticism to more or less 'mob attacks' for perhaps a lack of a better word, and pressuring others to change their way of life or how they choose to run their businesses. Likewise when said pressure takes really negative toll on the business or people operating it.
"Now, I can have personal boundaries about who I will discuss business policy with, when, etc., but that is changing my behavior as boundaries are not the same as rules."
Alright.
"For instance, if I posted a dance video and it was getting a ton of negative criticism that I started to take personally and was taking a toll on my emotional and mental health, I absolutely can and would set a boundary for myself to stop reading those comments, stop engaging, etc. ..."
Okay...
"...I would not try to impose my boundaries on the commenters as a rule - after all I posted the video publicly and thus opened the door for critique.
Okay, sure... Though like I'd mentioned in this response previously, there's a difference between constructive criticism or critiquing something, and continuing to do so after said person or business expressed their objections. I also don't think that you posting something makes it okay for others to essentially bully, harass, or keep going at you or your business to the point that it takes a toll on your emotional or mental health that you need to back away due to them not respecting your stance about yourself as a person or business. Even if they think they know better or think your business is better run differently.
"I can choose what of the criticism I find valuable or not, I don't have to immediately internalize every negative comment as how I "should" be, but rather take them as the commenter's opinon as that is all that it is. I am the one who decides how much value that person's opinion is to me."
Yes. However, I think like I'd mentioned there's a line that can be crossed if people aren't careful, and it can more or less go from simply critiquing or trying to give constructive criticism, to becoming a mob attack. So that's what I take issue with and I'm concerned about.
@cuddlefaery sorry for the typos, I'm happy to edit and clarify if you get confused by anything I said.
I'm new to this site and still learning my way. I appreciate the contribution that many of you do including the moderators who help keep this running. I was a bit discouraged after conversing with several new acquaintances and seeing many banned mid conversation. Reading this thread is giving me more insight. My one question was if there was a notion of penalty box vs. outright ban as there aren't that many female cuddlers in some areas but it sounds like the penalty box concept and appeals exists so some of the banned ones will perhaps get a chance for redemption. Thank you again.
I was just trying to get across that several of the specific sites that are listed here as bad and banned for pros to be on also classify this site as a sex site because of the open exchange of money for intimacy and dating by pros. The owner has said pros are allowed to advertise being dates, +1, and overnights for money without platonic cuddling but this isn't a dating or hookup site. Dating and hookup sites already know that's a big nono. (Back to the hidy hole)
@CuddleCare999 Welcome to the site! To answer your question, yes, outside of a ban as a more temporary punishment are:
@sillysassy 💯☺️🤗 Edit: I totally blanked that agreeing with Sassy would bump the thread. I apologize.
@starrynitecuds
The owner has said pros are allowed to advertise being dates, +1, and overnights for money without platonic cuddling
That isn't correct and we regularly take punitive action against profiles that offer dinner dates. The spirit of our policy is against generalised companionship services but it's nuanced so please read this post in full.
@starrynitecuds in addition to what Mark said, going on paid dates, etc. is considered escort work in many jurisdictions and so any pro cuddler offering those services needs to be aware of their local legal restrictions and requirements. Escorting is NOT the same as sex work, just the same as cuddling is not, but because it is a female dominated industry in our society they have all been lumped together in the collective mindset.
Once the feds catch on to paid cuddling, look for it to become illegal ‘til they find a way to regulate or tax it.
@NickWk It is taxable income. Pros are supposed to be filing taxes on it.
@NickWk many pros would probably prefer for it to be regulated similarly to massage therapy, with educational requirements and licensing. IMHO, such a move would benefit the industry overall making it safer for everyone with increased education, skill levels, preparedness, and business skills for the pros and better consistency, quality, and safety for clients.
Just gotta add my appreciation for @Bella_Sera 's explanations! If you're joining the thread late, at least go read what she said 😉😎
I mean, after you read what all the mods explained.... They explained things perfectly too, despite probably being annoyed at having to jump in several times. 🤦🏻♀️
@NickWk - Isn't it taxed the same way as any other gig work? When I deliver food for GrubHub, I'm technically self-employed. GH just being an app that connects me to customers. I receive a 1099 form every year and have to pay taxes on my earnings.
@NickWk @Mike403 Pro cuddlers on the site are independent businesses listing their cuddling service on the site so CC doesn't have to do anything surrounding taxes or sending forms. Pros have to keep track of income from sessions and about declaring it properly to be taxed appropriately. Payment options like PayPal and Venmo, next tax season, will be reporting earnings to the IRS if you make more the $600 in 2024... previously it was you had to both make over $20k and 200 payments/invoices made to you. CashApp might be apart of the new policy but I'm not certain on that, but Zelle wasn't.
Thank you, @RedFox16–these regulations have enacted interesting pressures all around the internet.
I don’t want to pour gasoline on fading embers, but do want to go on record as saying that a civilized conversation in a single thread is nothing amounting to a “mob attack,” no matter how adamant the dissenting opinions are.
Folks are very conflict-averse nowadays, but not every disagreement is a fight.
Thanks to all participants and mods for keeping it classy. Fascinating conversation with the opportunity to learn a lot.