Yeah, you can simply enjoy cuddling without being pressured to feel like you need to check certain boxes and fit into some sort of category. Not appealing. Not intriguing. Just weird . Seems to be the opposite of inclusiveness to me .
Boomers were born 1946 to 1964 so the youngest boomers are about 59 today. I am on the leading edge of Gen X (born between1965 and 1980).
@JohnR1972 Tell that to a 20-something. You are a Boomer because you are old to them going off first impressions. Few will have a chart handy when meeting you.
But this does illustrate the silliness of labels and how arbitrary they are.
@BoomerSpooner - agreed. There isn’t much nuance today.
There’s already too many ways people identify. Leave cuddling out of it.
IMO The last thing we need is another identity group name for everyone to argue about. And sexuality doesn't need to play a part.in it either.
@BoomerSpooner Oh no you didn't!🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 My day is complete!
Folks, identity labels are just a language tool to express an internal experience and create a feeling of connectedness and community with others who feel a similar internal experience - nothing more, nothing less.
We all use identity labels all the time, just some people feel some aspects of their identity are more present and important to their sense of self than others. Some people identify more with their their religious identity, some with their family role, some with their career, some with a chronic health condition, some with a major life experience, some with their race or ethnicity, some with their gender, some with their sexuality, some with their nationality, politics, education, status, etc.
All these different identities are present to different degrees for each person and so are more or less important to them - just because you don't feel your sexuality or gender are a major part of your sense of self doesn't mean that's true for everyone else. So please consider that before saying things that invalidate their experiences or are disparaging of the use of their use of terminology to express their experience. You don't need to understand or agree with their experience to respect it.
@PrettyLuv It is possible to simply state that "I am touch-oriented" in the body of a bio. This presents a drawback with potential partners that might be a perfect match in every other way by bringing touch to the forefront. Romance and compatibility involve a multitude of personal dynamics that might eclipse that one aspect of the relationship. To discount someone over whether they are touch oriented or not may be short-sighted. But I hear people referring to love languages and learning styles all the time in bios (or About Me)
@cuddlefaery
So please consider that before saying things that invalidate their experiences or are disparaging of the use of their use of terminology to express their experience. You don't need to understand or agree with their experience to respect it.
Your entire previous comment in this thread was about disparaging OP's attempt to find terminology to express his experience.
@CuddleWho No, my previous comment was about him trying to co-opt and insert into the LGBTQIA+ movement and why that is problematic. I explicitly stated there's no problem with having a strong identity with platonic cuddling and building community, the problem lies with equating it to a sexual orientation or gender as stated by OP. We can create our own terminology or use existing language without having to insert ourselves under another community's umbrella.
Tell me you didn't actually read, nor comprehend, what I wrote without telling me... 🙄
To give a much briefer summary, there are all sorts of issues around gender identity, sexual orientation, relationship structure, sexual arousal and fetishes, not to mention platonic touch which is not supposed to be considered sexual at all. There is a fairly well developed language for describing this stuff and you really should go learn that language if you want to communicate about this subject.
That isn’t to say there is broad consensus on all of it or that there is even broad consensus on how the language should be used. You can certainly debate any of it. But you shouldn’t walk into these conversations being ignorant of the basics of how people talk about this stuff. If you do, you’ll run into a buzzsaw.
Let's check on a definition: by "full on identity group", do you mean specifically one to fall under the LGBTQIA+ label? So that it must be related to sexual orientation, romantic orientation, gender identity, or otherwise being queer?
Or do you mean more broadly as a group of people who share a similar identity, whether or not related to LGBTQIA+? Also known as a community - i.e. the AAPI community, the geek community, the trans community, the feminist community, the gamer community, etc.
Because if it's the latter, @StructuredQueryLanguage , the platonic cuddling community does already exist and has already established some common language - as evidenced by this website and others like it. It just may not be super present in your local area, in which case perhaps you need to focus more on learning about the cuddle community as a whole, it's lexicon, the political and social advocacy at play, and how you can increase local awareness and participation.
@cuddlefaery I think you going a little over the top with the criticism and bringing too much of your own opinions into it and passing them off as general understanding. It’s not that simple. For example some people reject the whole identity politics thing and would rather think of everyone as Individuals with different characteristics rather than a set of groups.
People who physically join groups belong to many different groups and even group membership is a fuzzy thing not a hard determination. Who gets to decide whether someone is part of the group? The individual or the other people of the group? In most cases there is no decision making process at all.
While there may be more uniformity within a community such as LGBTQ… it’s not completely monolithic. And outside that community there is a much wider array of opinions. Many for example do not accept that trans women are women including many leftist feminists. And many do not accept that these groups have full authority to define the language used to describe them or their experience.
You are right in pointing out that the OP should do some more reading on the topic. People shouldn’t suggest changing language before understanding how that language is most commonly used.
Tell me you didn't actually read, nor comprehend, what I wrote without telling me...
I read it and comprehended it. I disagreed with it. And I now disagree that OP is co-opting anything. You often assert that anyone who disagrees with you just doesn't understand you. It gets really tedious. It would be really nice if you could lower the smugness and the lectures by a notch or 20.
The timer is ticking on this thread. 💣🧨💣
@StructuredQueryLanguage I think what you said is a coherent enough idea if you just left out the sex part and sexual orientation. I think what you are saying is that people who cuddle platonically are a rare enough group that they should have some kind of community or identity.
I would suggest that we do have a community. This site is part of it. Identity is perhaps a loaded term. Personally I don’t think it’s needed here and I guess I’d say the same about many areas. Why not just state how you feel and what you enjoy? Why try to create another in/out group distinction?
A couple of you deserve some pats on the back for pulling your thoughts together on this. Nicely done!!
I agree that to sexualize "platonic cuddling" is a miss ~ and ~ I also get how there are people who really like labels as a means to quickly distinguish their potential for a match.
And as much as "Boomer Spooner" works, "X cuddler" and "Y cuddle" really don't. "Zee-Spoonie" is fun to say though. 😉
Anywho, if you're looking for a term/word to use to identify as one who enjoys touch... My favorite to date is, "tactile-centric".
So I really appreciate folks' thoughtful comments here.
I want to state that I've now changed my opinion based on considering what people have said, and now my viewpoint is that the status quo structure of things is just fine and that the focus should be on growing the awesome community as it exists currently. Cuddling really is just a hobby, albeit an amazing one, and it would exclusionary or cause other issues to elevate it to the same level as something like a sexual orientation.
I do, however, as some have suggested, support people being more open about their preference for platonic cuddling and perhaps articulating that via terms like being "tactile-centric" or something. It could also still make sense for dating websites to have more cuddling-related differentiation options available too, but that should be treated more as a hobby-type thing in profiles.
@cuddlefaery I apologize if I was offensive with this post. This post represents an idea I've been thinking about a lot given my own personal experience since I enjoy cuddling and have no desire for sex or dating, so to me it felt logical to think of cuddle enthusiasm as something existing "in the place of a sexual orientation". However, it was inconsiderate of me to not consider the broader communities and their needs in proposing this idea.
Anyway, all the criticisms of me were valid, and I take back what I said for the most part 👍, though I still think there are some good ideas related to further growing and mainstreaming the cuddling community in its current form of course of course.
I don't think this is a good idea. This trivializes the experiences of queer people, such as myself.
So many people out there are either touch-negative or only believe in romantic cuddling
Depends on the people. In my experience, it is often straight monogamous people who only believe in romantic cuddling. Can't really do much about people whi are touch-adverse.
Furthermore, I think an expanded sexual orientation based on preferring platonic cuddling
Something like this already exists--bellusromantic/sexual. Someone who enjoys doing things that are often associated with romance (cuddling for example), but aren't interested in romance.
People who enjoy platonic touch do face some degree of adversity
What adversity?
[@pmvines All we need are 2 more members and we can officially start our religion]
😆
Ooh, we shall called said deity "He Who Cuddles Under The Blankets"...I love it!😍
Let's do it!😆
Katota sings, claps while shaking a tambourine
Hallujah! Hallujah! Glory be to cuddles! Hallujah!😁🙌
@pmvines Lol!😁 Quick, bring out the "sacred cuddle blanket"...I feel the "Holy Cuddle Spirit" taking over! Praise Him, Brother Vines!😆
@dave31415 except I've explicitly stated, multiple times, that no one group is monolithic in though and that identity is intersectional - meaning it is a combination of all our different aspects, traits, and group identities. People are not one-dimensional and the use of identity labels isn't to limit, it's descriptive language. As I've said previously, it's a communication tool. If "identity politics" (btw, a term coined and used by anti-LGBTQ politicians and media to shut down dialogue and a front for transphobia) isn't something important to you, that's completely valid. We all have our own areas of interest and passions and topics that we don't feel strongly about. Not everyone feels that their group identity is particularly vital to their everyday life. But for those who do, it absolutely is a big deal and politics is our way of ensuring that our everyday lives are not negatively impacted simply for our existing.
@CuddleWho I have zero problem disagreeing with people, there's several in the forums whom I disagree with and respect greatly because they are able to argue their point in good faith and they challenge me to reconsider my points in the process. I do not ever expect everyone to agree with me. What is tedious is when people such as yourself cherry-pick things I say out of context or put words in my mouth, clearly showing that you either do not understand what I said or are intentionally choosing to misrepresent what I said. Most of the time I try to avoid interacting with people like you who cannot seem to debate without resorting to those tactics, but I'm also not going to be a doormat. If you don't like that I communicate in long form, you're more than welcome to scroll by.
@StructuredQueryLanguage thank you for taking all that in stride.
I tend to describe myself as "touch-oriented" as well, as I very much am, so I get it. It's more than the love languages - it's also sensory processing issues and stimming, and just being hypersensitive to tactile input in general. Tactile sensory input can really have a major impact for those who are neurodivergent and/or have sensory processing disorder. I've found when I'm feeling really frazzled wndy ADHD symptoms are worse that wearing compression clothing, wrapping up in a blanket, wearing ear plugs and sunglasses, etc. can all help as they lessen the sensory overload and let my nervous system take a bit of a break. Cuddling does similar for me - it calms my brain the eff down while also allowing me a subtle stim via continuous tactile input from my fingers/hands.
So I truly get feeling like it's a big part of your makeup and central to your interactions, and I'm grateful you've reconsidered how you word it. If you need help figuring out some ways to build local community, my inbox is open.