@homeboy Thank you once again for posing these topics and questions. It has given all of us a chance to think about our cuddle preferences and if we would like to keep them the same or possibly change them. It has also allowed many people to think what types of events or affection outside of cuddling would be great for bonding. At times differences in opinion and or perceptions can lead to disagreements, if not more but overall I applaud you on the presentation. Everyone enjoy the weekend!
These discussions are fine I just dislike being told it’s internalized homophobia if we as men only wanna cuddle women. Discussions are fine. It started out great but inevitably turned into a something must be wrong with you and open up your narrow mind as always.
I read all the comments in this thread with great interest. I am a gay man who has enjoyed cuddling with a good number of both men and women. With men, I have sometimes become aroused, whereas with women, I haven't. Funny, now that I think of it— I have at times become aroused while cuddling with men who have said they are not straight, but I don't recall becoming aroused cuddling with men who have told me they are straight. Maybe it's that something subliminal in me knows when there's the possibility of mutual attraction, and that affects my physical response? I don't know. I know that even with non-straight men that I haven't thought I was attracted to, I have at times experienced arousal, whereas with women -- even with the most beautiful women -- I have not. I don't chose my cuddle partners based on whether I think I might become aroused, though, and I don't act on arousal; it's just a fact of life. Maybe someday I'll find myself becoming aroused while cuddling with a woman. If that happens, I don't think it will change my disposition toward cuddling with women; it will just be like "Oh, that happened. Interesting." I will admit that regardless of the presence or absence of arousal, I get something from cuddling with men that I don't get from cuddling with women. In my experience, there is something deeply satisfying about cuddling with people of the same gender that you find yourself attracted to, so far be it from me to expect straight men to be keen on cuddling with men when they find cuddling with women to be more satisfying.
I don't believe there's any agenda here trying to get straight men to cuddle with gay men. I'm more than happy to cuddle with other gay men, thank you very much. I'd like to see more men cuddle with men regardless of sexual orientation, simply because I've seen it be beneficial to both the men and their loved ones. I'd likewise encourage gay men to try cuddling with women, because I've found it to be beneficial myself (there is something deeply soothing about being touched in a way that feels solely devoted to my wellbeing). If a man would rather cuddle with an animal than with a man, that's his choice. I will admit that I might at times be more disposed to cuddling with an animal than with a woman, and I don't think that makes me misogynistic. It just depends on the woman and my mood. I won't cuddle with just any man, either. It has to feel right.
Gosh, I have spent two hours reading and responding to this thread! Thanks to anyone who has spent a few minutes reading my response. I hope it answers the OP, @homeboy , and I thank him for bringing it up.
For the record, gaslighting means when someone tries to convince someone that some event that they observed to happen didn’t actually happen and that their observation of such event was a figment of their insanity.
Although scientific studies don't make it so, in "Straight Identity and Same-Sex Desire: Conservatism, Homophobia, and Straight Culture" by Tony J. Silva published in the March 2019 issue of Social Forces, the author suggests that heterosexual identification, normative gender practices, and homophobia are each separate constructs although they "are tightly connected" "for many men." But just because they are tightly connected for many men doesn't mean they are tightly connected for all men. What makes all this tough is that sometimes people truly feel one way but their behavior often belies their words. That said, I tend to take people at their word until and unless I have clear and compelling evidence to the contrary.
@dave31415 Gaslighting is not just observed events. Per the dictionary it applies when you "manipulate (someone) using psychological methods into questioning their own sanity or powers of reasoning."
For example, the classic "that's what love is" or "if you cared about me" or "everybody else would" — all gaslighting.
There's much more on YouTube for people who want to understand gaslighting in romantic relationships in particular, where it's rampant.
Gaslighting me on gaslighting — well done 🤣
Speaking as a straight woman who has only cuddled straight men, I would like to cuddle gay men but I haven’t had the opportunity. As a Pro, I want to cuddle everyone, I love getting to know people from every type of life situation, and if I can help in some way, make a really nice experience for someone.
@carrieanne Good point! I am open to cuddling “Everyone” too but never cuddled with a lesbian before! I could imagine it would be fun! Hopefully one day we will both get the chance to cuddle more people of diverse orientations! 🤗
@cde123 That’s what I call language creep. When people try to borrow the power of a negative sounding phrase to apply it to something else rather than having to make a more substantial argument. I'll give you that gaslighting need not necessarily be about an event. But it should at least require that the person doing the gaslighting is at least aware of what they are saying is false (hence manipulating) and that they are trying to fool someone by convincing them that they are crazy when they know they are not. So someone cannot gaslight someone into believing something that they in do in fact believe. Nor is it gaslighting if they think the person really is crazy (whether or not they really are). So gaslighting is really quite rare and almost impossible to do in a public forum and almost impossible to do with someone you hardly know. It require isolating the person so that no one else can validate the person's sanity.
Another common example is "mansplaining". The term arose in the office environment when one coworker would repeat something another coworker said as if the first person's opinion was not strong enough on its own. The observation was that men did this more with women, hence the name. Then the term began to creep and some women started to use it whenever a man expressed a strong opinion in a argument with a woman or expressed an opinion about something for which women in general have more familiarity with. For example, they might accuse me of mansplaining to them what mansplaining is. Your statement at the end about "gaslighting me on gaslighting" would be an example, though I assume you meant it as a joke.
What's wrong with language creep is that it is a rhetorical trick. Rather than making a winning argument using intellectually honest means, you try to distract the audience by making it into an ad hominem criticism of the person you are debating. You are no longer making your point, you are instead putting the person on the defensive about having some negative quality or using some trick of their own through the association with the negative phrase. Calling someone or some opinion racist, sexist or transphobic or whatever when they are not (as the words are commonly understood) are common examples.
I think this trick of language creep has been utilized more by the political left (being more adept at language to begin with) but the right is catching on and starting to do more of it too. An example would be how recently some of the right have begun to refer to teaching children about homosexuality to be "grooming", a term meaning the manipulation of children at an early age to trust an adult who plans to exploit that trust to sexually abuse them in the future. It's such a powerfully negative term that it immediately puts them on the defensive as if they had suddenly been accused of being a child sex perpetrator, when their intention was really just to foster tolerance. It seems to free the user of language creep from making a valid argument, in this case, about why children knowing about and accepting gay people is a bad thing. Everybody already knows that grooming is a bad thing. That word has a powerful negative connotation. And no one wants to be in a situation of having to argue why what they are doing is not grooming nor can they fully ignore the accusation.
I just like to speak up when I see this and point it out because when it becomes the norm it leads to unhelpful discussion that does nothing but increase tension. You can believe whatever you want and argue whatever you want but at least keep it civil and have respect for the other person you disagree with. By making use of language creep you are distracting the audience from the point you are really trying to make and relying on disingenuous rhetorical tricks to bail you out. People don't always do it intentionally. It can simply become a habit. So I'm not accusing anyone. I just wish people would think it over and take more care in their argumentation to keep it constructive.
Vegetarians only eat vegetables and carnivores only meat?
@homeboy That's interesting and it seems correct in my experience. For example, I'm generally a person that's very in favor of and unapologetic about traditional male masculine culture and behavior (not all of it of course). At the same time, I obviously enjoy cuddling, which doesn't necessarily fit stereotypic masculine behavior. I consider myself a feminist in the simple way I understand the term. I'm generally straight but completely comfortable around other orientations. I'm politically moderate. At some point I probably considered these all things that had to be grouped together. As an older, wiser person I can how they are all independent.
That is you can be like Joe Exotic; a gay culturally conservative guy who engaged in masculine behavior (wrangling Tigers). Being a politically liberal man, a vegetarian or into flower arranging (or cuddling) doesn't make you gay. Often you see people who are secretly gay (seem's often to be evangelical preachers) making the most homophobic statements, (Also as demonstrated by the military dad in the film American Beauty).
The fact that there tends to be so much correlation and so little tolerance makes it hard for people to be their natural selves. In my gun forums, I can't even admit I voted for Joe Biden. It's practically assumed that everyone in gun forum is a Trump supporter, straight etc. Should I mention it, I'd be called liberal, gay, you name it. In other groups of mine, say at work or in academia, it's practically assumed that you are the opposite. I'd be hesitant to mention for example that I hunt or don't support some liberal positions.
The good news I think is that things are changing.
@carrieanne - Has me thinking about who I would and would not be comfortable cuddling with. On the YES side are straight women, bi-women, lesbian women, and surprisingly (to me), both trans women and trans men. I hope nobody wants me to explain, because I can't. I don't understand it all myself.
@dave31415 I loved your essay on language creep. Hear, hear!
@GreatHornedOwl No explanation is ever needed, imo. We can only speak for ourselves on this topic. We may not understand everything about our own preference. It just is.
@SuperManCuddles i totally agree. Hoping so, also.
We should give ourselves a hand. We managed to have an intense and passionate discussion without the mods feeling the need to lock the door.
A great thread with lots of open, honest and thoughtful communication. I would take more of these.