This is nonsense, cuddles means touch, a virtual session does not achieve that unless you are using some drug that makes you hallucinate
And @GuyverGordon the definition wasn't mine, it was from the M-W dictionary that is popular here.
Correct. But you did introduce the definition in your previous post, correct? Therefore, it seems to be a very valid
And there are those who take data, analyze, and try and make the most correct conclusion based on the data. Then there are those who have a conclusion prior to seeing data, and then attempt to distort the data in an attempt to support the pre-drawn conclusion. Guess which one you are doing.
That feels like an attack with no real defense to your position. Are you able to proceed without resorting to nameless name calling?
For example, to continue your logic, if one of the effects of a massage is that it relaxes you, and you can also feel relaxed as the result of a video call, is that a virtual massage?
This example shows that you didn't really read what I said. Your logic example and my logic are not the same. In my argument, I handled all of the definition you provided, not simply the effects.
Finally, your argument was that virtual cuddling was "a fallacy" because by definition it had to be "physical". I showed that the way the definition was phrased, there was room that a term virtual cuddle could have some merit. Is cuddle and virtual cuddle the same? No, and I never claimed they were. However I can see where the term "virtual cuddle" can, in fact, exist.
@InfiniteJoy Not sure why everyone is getting wrapped up in semantics. Unless you think people are so stupid they go into a "virtual cuddle" expecting someone to reach through the screen to hug them, they know exactly what it is. Why are you obsessing over the name?
If you never want to do one, more power to you. That's your right. The site obviously thinks virtual is legit, because they are charging their 15% for it. If it's not for you, then stop worrying about it. Its existence does not harm you in any way.
I think at this point , maybe a Virtual Cuddles Mega Thread, is in order.
@OhioMike As many topics that get thread after thread after thread ad nauseum at this point literally 60 percent of all topics could use a mega thread (still holding out hope for a mega boner thread to be stickied, so I can be a wise sage and direct all new posters to my mega sticky boner thread )
😂 @pmvines did you really just type "...mega sticky boner....? 🤣
Yuppers ! Pun intended
@Sheena123 I am not against the idea of video calls for companionship as I have said in every post here. If that is something that works for the benefit of both, I'm happy for both people. I have no issue with professional cuddlers. I'm not sure where that inference came from as I have only been with professional cuddlers and we have both quite enjoyed the cuddle.
@GuyverGordon The whole premise of your argument is the the dictionary definition was not literal, but symbolic (because dictionaries do that all the time...), and you had to take that premise to distort the fact of what I presented to conform with your conclusion which it didn't support.
I don't understand the why people are so opposed to calling it what it really is (virtual companionship) instead of trying to shoehorn it into a label that doesn't apply. There is nothing wrong with virtual companionship and if people enjoy it, I encourage it.
And I didn't call you a name, I only called out the action you took. Or is that why you called it "nameless name calling"? (which makes as much sense as virtual cuddling come to think of it)
This is the last thing I offer in defense of the term virtual cuddling.
You provided the definition of cuddling, let me give you the definition of virtual: being such in essence or effect though not formally recognized or admitted (M-W definition of virtual)
Is cuddling the same as virtual cuddling? No (I can't help but feel like you are thinking that is what I am saying -- it is not). What I am saying is there is room for the term "virtual cuddling" to exist. I feel like I have given you more than enough evidence to support that. I've done all I can. It is up to you on whether or not to open your mind.
Believe it or not , I began this thread looking at the definition to question whether there really was room for the term "virtual cuddle" to beign with. Despite your inference to your "nameless name calling" (a term I would be happy to explain later to someone more willing to listen), I started with the data.
I don't know if you noticed, but up till now, I have always included virtual sessions with the virtual cuddling, either in commas or parathesis. Up until now, I wasn't entirely sure where I was; I didn't have anything to really refute the term, but I also didn't have anything to say it didn't belong, after all, this site has cuddle in its name. (And again, virtual cuddling isn't the same as cuddling). However, as a result of this thread, I now strongly hold that virtual cuddling, as a legitimate term, exists. From now on, I call it as I see it: virtual cuddle.
At this point, I wanna see an @btc13 and @GuyverGordon throwdown. I would wager a BTC on btc.
@OhioMike Out of curiosity, did you make that meme or did you find it? (I mean with the words included).
... I love it either way 😄
@RiverBreeze 😆
@GuyverGordon , thank you . yeah , found that meme ,words included ,on the internet 👍
(But I still like the idea of a Virtual Cuddle Mega Thread )
If you don't like the term "virtual cuddle," call it "virtual comfort." There, problem solved.
Virtual cuddles = cure for loneliness. The name is parsed out to death. Think of it that way and I think it's more understandable.
@WriterGF I could get behind that ... but I believe we should call it "problem virtually solved"?
😄
Even when cuddling in person, the companionship that inevitably comes along with it is one of the components that is enjoyable about it. The two things wind up being conflated in the context of this site however. The benefits that GuyverGordon cites are the result of cuddling are much more related to the companionship that comes with the cuddling than the actual cuddling itself. The benefits of the actual cuddling (oxytocin release, addressing touch starvation, etc) are only achieved through in person cuddling where the holding close is actual and not symbolic. When we discuss "virtual cuddles" and even in many cases "public cuddles", we are actually talking about the companionship element that is provided but without any actual cuddling. My suggestion that it be referred to as virtual companionship rather than virtual cuddling is based on the fact that the only benefits that are derived from it are related to the companionship aspect and none of the benefits of actual physically holding someone are present.
But at the end of the day we have "cuddle" in the name of the website, and therefore for some people all activities initiated through this site must be placed in the context of cuddling through whatever tortured logic is necessary to get there. If any of you feel it to be that important to call virtual companionship "virtual cuddling", as though there is something that distinguishes the two, go ahead. Just don't expect me to accept that as proper terminology.
@btc13 Unless you're posting in a thread on the topic, why would you need to ever use or accept the terminology? It's not your thing, so just ignore it.
@WriterGF I apologize for sharing my thoughts on a topic being discussed in a public forum. You can all return to your echo chamber uninterrupted.
@btc13 Thanks.
For those that don't follow star wars that closely (or at least the newish stuff), the character there is Echo from Bad Company. (just fyi)
Personally, I enjoy virtual cuddles as an adjunct to in-person cuddles - not as a replacement. Virtual cuddling is often handled just as a virtual hang out with varying degrees of emotional intimacy, but for those with more imagination and willing to flex their creative muscles it can be a completely different experience. I've attended virtual cuddles sessions & group events that involved things like breath work, self-massage, guided visualizations, and even role play. There's so many ways that people can get creative with how they connect to others, and virtual connections are just an extension of that.
I've noticed that the people who tend to really enjoy and benefit the most from virtual cuddling tend to also be people who already have experience in things like online role play, meditation, energy work, etc. The people who tend to be the most vehemently against it are those who tend to prefer concrete reality and/or those who lack experience stretching their creativity and imagination. I think most people seem to fall somewhere in the middle... but it is also highly dependent on the person hosting the session. If the host is knowledgeable and skilled in how to lead virtual interactions and get creative in problem solving the lack of physical closeness, then it tends to be a more positive experience. If the host however treats it more like just a virtual chat or hangout session, there tends to be more disconnect and dissatisfaction.
Your results may vary, but I encourage people to try out virtual cuddling with an experienced host who offers more structure than just chatting and spending time together. It's an invaluable tool for people who lack access due to location, funds, mobility, illness, etc. to still get some of their needs met.
I think most people seem to fall somewhere in the middle... but it is also highly dependent on the person hosting the session.
I must have had some fantastic hosts. 😄
I really did 😄😄😄😄😄
I love virtuals! It’s a great way to build a connection, it’s makes for the in person cuddle to be way better.
I have a regular that moved away and now we do virtual visits whenever he needs a comfy person to talk to!! ☺️😁🦊
I had my 1st virtual session and I must say we both enjoyed the conversation and interaction. Ofcourse this is not for everyone but if it works for you go for it.