@cuddlebugTM So if (for some unfathomable reason) I were to be trying really hard during a cuddle to create this feeling that I don't get from physical contact... even though it wouldn't work, if I was really intent on reifying this impossibility, the cuddle would suddenly be sexual?
Intent isn't physical, you see—in my case, in that situation, no amount of intent will make any sort of physical change. The physical situation would have to be radically altered for that intention to take.
And then there's the arousal thing! Never mind babies, people get erections when they're executed via hanging, and I don't think anyone's ever said it was sexual. Sometimes the body does stuff and it's nothing to do with the person wearing that body. And, then again, sometimes the person wants to do something and the body refuses. So which is more definitive: the intent, or what actually happens?
That's puzzling. I'm going to need to think more.
I didn’t think the post was on how to make something sexual . My point was if you gave no sexual intentions and do not behave in a sexual way then it’s platonic . I’ve had men get errections they didn’t act on it by behaving sexually towards me .
If your intent is sexual and behavior is sexual then it’s ckearly not platonic .
Example I’ve had many massages . Some was purely a platonic massage meant for relaxation or addressing muscle pain . Others with my husband was to pamper me but his intentions were to lead towards sex . The intention and behavior is what matters .
No, but, see, even if my intent were to be "arousal, oh boy, let's get some arousal in here" there would still be no clothes-off behavior or erotic touching—intent and behavior can be very clearly split in my case, which makes "platonic has to do with intent" a bit more complicated than it looks at first glance.
If intent and behavior are both sexual (like, if someone wants to be aroused, and puts a hand where it shouldn't be during a cuddle), that's obviously non-platonic even by my recent definition, because the behavior is genital-related (and probably there's arousal, too).
But what if only one or the other is sexual? Intent without behavior, or behavior without intent?
For example, suppose I kiss someone. It's just mouth-touching to me, so on my side it's very simply platonic. But what if the other side wants it to be a super-duper, happy-in-the-pants thing—and can't make it so? Tons of intent, no behavior! By my recent definition, it would still be platonic for them (albeit unhappily so). But by your definition, it would be sexual (for them? for me? for both of us? I'm not sure).
That's why I asked: because you make a good point with the intent thing, and I'm not sure how to make sense of it in real-world situations.
You seem to be making things way too complicated . Yes the other person can have other intentions it happens all the time . That’s why we have personal boundaries so if someone tries to turn something that is intended to be platonic into sexual behavior we say stop ! Also it’s why communication is important so that everyone is on the same page .
[nod, nod] Yeah, I do that. When I find an idea that's a tangled knot in my head, I don't like to stop until I've gotten it completely unraveled, and I unravel things best by writing things out and exchanging hypotheses with other people.
"Can kissing be platonic?"
If the question was only, "Can you, personally, kiss someone without becoming sexually aroused?" it would be easy.
But if you can then it’s possible . Doesn’t mean everybody can . Some people are hyper sexual and turn everything they can into something sexual . They lack boundaries and respect for consent . But a kiss isn’t automatically sexual .
For me the line between sexual and platonic is very clear and unambiguous. That’s why the rules of this site are so important if you follow the rules you ensure a platonic experience. If you have the intention to break those rules then it becomes sexual. For me I’ve accepted a non sexual future and I’m very comfortable with that. If we bring romance into the mix perhaps that blurs the definition.
This site is about platonic connections so romance and/or sex are not appropriate intentions to have.
As far kissing I think it’s clear also a kiss on hand or a peck in the cheek can clearly be platonic. Prolonged kissing sensual kissing or kissing on the lips are certainly not platonic.
@cuddlebugTM Oh, I think we're actually seeing the actual question differently. [delighted] How odd and unexpected!
You see, when I look at "Can kissing be platonic," my brain translates the words into something more like "Can mouth-touching be non-sexual"—and I haven't got a very clear understanding of what all is sexual (so obviously I can't be sure what's non- sexual). Until I know how far the term "sexual" extends, I haven't got enough information to say where mouth-touching is in relation to it.
— Spoiler, wherein I attempt to explain, using human language, the workings of a brain that only speaks Human as a second language. I am very bad at this, but I keep trying. Who knows, maybe I'll get it one of these days.
Actually my brain translation's more like a string of concepts:
[judgment call: true/false] [some mouth-touching][potential/possible][not-s̢͎̰̲̲̄͒͊ͫ̽͠͝?̬̼̥ͬͩͫ̄͛͢͝x͇͇̗̺̏̎̉̓͊͆́͟2̧̛͎̱̻̥͔ͧͮͩ̿̔͊̈́?̥̝̠̤̻̪ͩ̉ͭ͐̂̓ͭ͠ĺ̙͖̜̳̑] [conclusion?] ... [data required: define s̢͎̰̲̲̄͒͊ͫ̽͠͝?̬̼̥ͬͩͫ̄͛͢͝x͇͇̗̺̏̎̉̓͊͆́͟2̧̛͎̱̻̥͔ͧͮͩ̿̔͊̈́?̥̝̠̤̻̪ͩ̉ͭ͐̂̓ͭ͠ĺ̙͖̜̳̑]
Or maybe it's more like: "Statement: 'some mouth-touching is not [term undefined]'. Find truth."
Or maybe: "kissing" [infinite stack of 'kissing' images, mouths touching everything from other mouths to the sweet, sweet ground] "kissing," "humans," "met on cuddling site" [children removed, dirt removed, trophies removed (etc.)] "Compare to 'sexual'" [...] [error]
I dunno. Something like that.
There has been multiple views on this topic so I will only speak for myself. I've seen nothing mentioned of the science of sexual feelings. It's a chemical thing. I'll spare a 4,000 word response and just post a link.
https://markturrell.wordpress.com/2012/03/18/sex-and-the-brain-how-neuroscience-may-soon-change-all-our-relationships-6/
I've always been a highly sexual person. It's only got more intense as I've gotten older. With that being said, when I am in bed with someone, there is no question as to whether I'm sexually aroused or not. Intent doesn't matter, as I may not have intented to be sexual into this person. I can tell myself that nothing will happen and it won't if that's my choice, however, anything further than cuddling would be too difficult. Kissing, for example, would be sexual for me, at that point.
For those that do not have sexual feelings, this may seem nonsensical. In my humble opinion, the platonic feeling and sexual feeling are like black and white. When you're aroused you know know it!
What you do about it is another story.
I do believe kissing and intimate massage can absolutely be platonic. I experience it fairly regularly. However, if I am aroused it's a no-no as it's no longer platonic for me.
We are all different. Do you.
Disclaimer: the situations discussed in this post occur in my personal life and not with clients.
I'm noticing a lot of discussion on semantics which is really interesting, but my mind is much more focused on the topic of consent which is really at the core of all of this. Some people can give a kiss with any kind of thought, emotion or intention behind it. Platonoc, non-platonic etc... But none of that really matters. If someone has set a clear boundary that kissing is not allowed for example, and all parties understand and agree to this, then any attempt to kiss them is an outright violation of that boundary. It's aggressive and very disrespectful. This is what concerns me more than anything. And I see it often. A huge part of this work is about helping people understand consent and respecting boundaries. Culturally, we have a lot of healing to do here...
It also states no kissing allowed if you are accepting money for cuddling . There is a similar expectstion that non paid cuddlers not use this site to hook up . Of course nobody really police this sort of thing so it goes back to whay @JRose said re consent. What two consenting adults choose to do behind closed doors is their business , however when its not agreed to by both parties it is aggressive and is assault.
@JRose 100% agree. Everyone can have their thoughts on the subject and they can obviously vary greatly. Boundaries MUST ALWAYS BE RESPECTED for all parties. Especially, when there are clear rules.
I had a client yesterday (Not a CC user) that although he clearly understood my boundaries, as we discussed them and reviewed my Code of Conduct, that actually said although he would respect my boundaries that he had none! Feel free to touch him and do whatever to his body. Sir, my boundaries ARE your boundaries.
Anything that does not have the consent of both parties is agreeably "aggressive and very disrespectful". It happens far too frequently. This includes even the most innocent and platonic of acts. I teach my cuddle partners to ask before moving hands to a questionable spot. We also review our personal boundaries before the session. I personal don't love my face being touched. I will let them know that. They will do the same. For us to ignore each others boundaries is unacceptable.
I would say that culturally, we have a lot of accepting to do here.
Yes, all the yes. If it is helpful, think about someone who has experienced some kind of abuse relating to their boundaries in the past (since we were all children once, we probably all have experienced this to some extent). It can take an incredible amount of healing and personal work just to figure out what their personal boundaries even ARE. Even more work to be able to set them and even MORE work yet to be able to reinforce them when challenged! We never know what someone else has gone through so please, take each person's boundaries seriously. Honor them, respect them, even support them! (& do this for yourself too.)
I think forehead and cheek kisses can be platonic but I'd be a bit concerned if a platonic connection tried to kiss anywhere else.
I kiss immediate family. I kiss my son on the forehead and lips. I don't kiss any friends. No biggie. But I have a definite no exception rule when cuddling. Kissing on the cheek is way too close to my mouth. Kissing my neck is an erogenous zone and something I only like my boyfriend doing. I suppose the hand would be ok but usually it's around the face and neck that happens and I'm ultimately too much of a germophobe to find it enjoyable. That's just personal preference. My natural submissive nature tends to let little kisses on the forehead go but then I feel my body tense for the rest of the session.
To me, kissing on forehead or hand can be platonic. With family members or very close friends, a PECK on the cheek or lips is fine. A prolonged kiss is not platonic to me. Reserved for someone I am in an intimate relationship with, not a casual cuddle.
I'm giving a different view on this as someone whose aromantic and asexual so all forms of affection for me will always be platonic, something I feel is pretty ingrained my whole life. I feel those who aren't it might be easier for people to develop feelings for others and it could turn into something more. With that in the picture if one person feels kissing is romantic, then I think its safe to say that's what they feel and shouldn't really be pressured to go further or think something else. That's what they're comfortable with.
following site rules on kissing & naturist sessions being in place does protect everyone involved. Must be awaiting summer n then - sessions can b in any place, in open spaces & indoors too, What do you like?
Interesting that you've brought this back again, and that you chose to include the naturalist side of the debate.
As far as kissing goes, it is what it is perceived to be, or with an understanding of what the intent is before it's delivered so to each their own. Boundaries, thanks @JRose for reinforcing that one, are personal and we all as a society as pointed out by @Scarlette need to work on establishing personal boundaries and learning how to hold those lines because if we as a human & individual don't hold our own boundaries why would we expect anyone else to? So yes, we as a society need to work on boundaries. Kissing ~ discuss it beforehand, simple enough. If you are the type that kisses for affection or as a culturally accepted action you are already aware at this point in your life that not everyone has the same view as you so just put it out there is a non-threatening way when discussing the logistics of meeting a cuddle partner pro or not. It gives you both some time to think about the action before it becomes an issue. Besides, cuddle relationships change just like life changes, with familiarity & trust boundary are relaxed or stretched all the time. So issuing a blanket yea or nay won't work in cuddling anymore than it'd work with friends or family.
A quick for instance to this, I will be much more receptive to closer full contact cuddles in the winter in cooler climates when the risk of sweating, full skin to skin sweat, plus any possible smell associated with it isn't as big a factor then when it's 89 with both humidity and dew point in the 90's. Ew, stay away from me with that sweaty body stuff. But as I get to know the person and learn to trust and appreciate their unique qualities I would be more willing to be full contact in that sticky summer environment much more often since our relationship has changed over our time together. I know see the person inside the skin suit, I see them and not the outside appearance. Same with anything in life, we are always changing and evolving so something debatable like to kiss or not to kiss should change and evolve also.
What has intrigued me about this post was @cuddlebugTM's inclusion of nudist/naturalist in what is and isn't acceptable.
I was also surprised how many people weighed in on that lifestyle and cuddling. I think this definition is perfect to sum it up. Both the naturalist and cuddle lifestyle.
I only nude cuddle with friends not clients or people I meet here . Before coming here I did have clients that were naturist . I have no problem with this because they understand non sexual nudity . I wouldn’t nude cuddle with someone who isn’t already a naturist . Sex can’t be platonic it can be unemotional but not platonic .
So true, so true. If you don't get it, if you don't understand the lifestyle it's hard to see it as non sexual. That, right there, is what we all here are fighting. The understanding of what platonic cuddling is. The acceptance of it for the lasting benefits that go beyond the immediate act.
I think the human body is only the suit we've been given to live on earth and it's not us as individuals. Kinda like jobs where uniforms are required, not all the uniforms are brand new and nice looking. Some are faded, stained, stretched but still serviceable so you wear it, but it's not you, it's your required uniform. I have been blessed with nice curves but I also have an enormous amount of loose skin due to drastic weight loss that will never disappear completely without skin removal. Another poster commented about being big and hairy. I know a young Asian man who is so hairy he refuses to be shirtless, he actually used to have my daughter wax his back for him, he was 22 at the time. Some women I know hate that they are so small breasted they only see areola's and nipples, obviously there is more than that but her personal hangups have been so feed and nurtured that she doesn't see how rocking those teeny tiny things complement the rest of her body so well and in perfect proportion.
In the perfect world, my lasered, plastic surgery body would be laying naked next to an amazing individual who had used each of the yearly allowance of 40 subsidized hours of emotional therapy allowed for each citizen over the last 3 years. We'd be laying there, respecting sexual boundaries sharing a laugh about the latest political satire and discussing the merits of composite versus wood for skies plus the best way to keep the towel or sheet up in the hammock since a rope hammock really is the gold standard but just doesn't allow for laying naked for any length of time without something to cushion those holes! Our emotional struggles would be well in hand and we were just reaping the happiness benefits of being together and touching. Naked, cuddling, in a hammock, non sexually but definitely sensually.
But this is the real world and I'd be okay if I could just find like minded people or help educate those who don't understand.
@Scarlette so not tempted with your female relatives then? What about cuddles with them if hugs go well...
How about a little timeout since you continue to bait in the forums after being warned. [reurbo]
Fortunately, @SmellyFatMan, this is not a college. This is a website where adults with a capacity for self-control have agreed to exercise that self-control and enjoy some nice platonic cuddling—without kissing, platonic or otherwise. Should I link you to the Terms and Conditions again?
@poolman Got nothing better to do than going around resurrecting old threads? It is annoying and so far you haven't offered anything new or of value, you're just addressing long gone members or adding a short answer to a dead thread. I think you should stop.
@mellow It doesn't break community guidelines. As a newbie, I do find some of them interesting.
Culturally, kissing and be platonic just as much as it can be romantic however for a platonic cuddling session, kissing is not appropriate, regardless.
Locking this thread as it was once long dead, the last comment on it being from January 2019, it holds nothing productive, and the person who dug up this thread is trying to @ someone who hasn't been active on the site in 4 years.