Definitions

cuddlefaerycuddlefaery
edited May 16 in General

What is your definition of "cuddling"?

What is your definition of "platonic"?

What is your definition of "platonic cuddling"?

Going back through some of the more contentious threads, I'm struck yet again by a rather painfully obvious fact about humans: language is fluid, ever-evolving, and heavily shaped by culture. As a result, we often use the same words while internally holding very different definitions. As a linguistics and anthropology nerd, I find these differences both fascinating and deeply frustrating — because the vast majority of people I encounter don't seem to grasp the importance and impact of that gap. It's one of the reasons I care so much about intentional language use and how word choice changes the impact of communication.

So I wanted to ask y'all the questions above, because I think people might be surprised by how much diversity likely exists in how we use those two words and that combined phrase. I'm not looking for copy-pasted dictionary definitions — I'd love for people to use their own words to describe what they mean when they say "cuddling," "platonic," and "platonic cuddling."

Are there any other often used terms in the cuddle-sphere for which you think people hold varying definitions?

Comments

  • cuddlefaerycuddlefaery
    edited May 16

    Here's mine:

    cuddling - the action of sharing physical affection. Sometimes it's obviously mutual (a parent cuddling with their child, a person cuddling with their spouse, etc.), and sometimes it's perceived as one-sided (a person cuddling with a stuffed animal, someone cuddling an unwilling cat, etc.)

    platonic - pertaining to non-sexual, non-romantic, non-familial friendly relations. It's a "you know it when you feel it" sort of connection with another person with whom you are or would like to be friends.

    platonic cuddling - the act of exchanging physical affection with a person towards whom you feel friendly. By definition it is non-sexual, non-romantic, and if practiced ethically it should always be mutually desired instead of one-sided.

    (slight edits for typos)

  • HeyCasualTouchHeyCasualTouch

    As someone new to cuddling, I like your definitions. Seems to me that platonic cuddling uses physical touch to create feelings of safety, acceptance, and belonging between both (all?) people involved. ”You’re safe with me, I’m accepted by you,” etc.

  • team_cuddleteam_cuddle

    Great questions for us all to reflect on and dive deeper into the subject.

    Cuddling: : my definition would be two entities holding each other closely like hugging but also can be sitting or laying down. Comforting one another or just enjoying being embraced.

    **Platonic:*** means to me friendly and non sexual.

    platonic cuddling I would just say add those two definitions together.

    Unfortunately, some people choose not to keep themselves under control and that's when we hear about negative cuddle experiences. Communicating is key, consent is key. Yes means yes and no means no. Everyone should respect each other's decisions.

  • MonkeyNeedsAHugMonkeyNeedsAHug

    Sign up in just a few seconds and instantly communicate with people looking to cuddle near you. Full communication. No barriers. Completely free.

  • kendrayk74kendrayk74

    @cuddlefaery Great topic!

    Here's mine:

    cuddling - physical contact that is intended to instill feelings of comfort, soothing, and connection to one or more of the participants.

    platonic - drawing from Plato's philosophy of forms, something Platonic is the ideal of all that is necessary and sufficient for a thing to be that thing. In theory there is a perfect realm of these Forms, and our world consists of imperfect embodiments of these ideals.

    platonic cuddling - platonic cuddling is "just" cuddling (that which is necessary and sufficient for something to be cuddling, and nothing that is not). So kinds of touch where the intention is to do things other than or in addition to instilling feelings of comfort, soothing, and connection falls outside of the platonic cuddling realm.

    I agree that here, the presumption is that when people here say "cuddling", they mean "platonic cuddling". However in common usage, cuddling can certainly include activities that fall outside of the realm of platonic cuddling (where the intent may be to instill feelings of arousal, etc.).

  • MmmeowwMmmeoww
    edited May 17

    What I think, its VERY important to contemplate here is that when we derive rather than go off fact that disrupts the consistency. Respectfully, I personally think that leaving room for one’s “opinion” on definition rather than a fact, that’s a way to dismantle a system. Specifically speaking to CC. Here’s an example:
    I have had a cuddler on more than one specific occasion ask me this EXACT question and I responded with the fact: the true definition of the word(and or using my phone to look it up and read it together). Upon receiving my response the other human would give me their own option on what they believe the definition is. This resulted in some sort of tactic to imply what they are wanting or willing to do, WHICH IS ALWAYS VIOLATING TOS.

    So food for thought, I never leave my doors crack I keep them shut. Knowledge is power and these are the ways we can most in fact make sure this site is used for platonic snuggles as well.
    Happy snuggling all🪬

  • cuddlefaerycuddlefaery

    @kendrayk74 I believe that is the first time I've seen the original meaning of Platonic used correctly AND applicable to cuddling. Kudos!

  • cuddlefaerycuddlefaery
    edited May 17

    Respectfully, I personally think that leaving room for one’s “opinion” on definition rather than a fact, that’s a way to dismantle a system.

    @Mmmeoww I absolutely do agree that wording can be weaponized and intentionally used for subterfuge and manipulation. However, I don't believe that definitions are ever "fact", and I take that belief from how most modern linguists view language as dynamic rather than static. Instead of there being facts vs opinions on definitions, there are conventional/traditional/historical usage, common/popular/majority usage, niche/subcultural/reclaiming usage, etc.

    If definitions were fact rather than changeable based upon context, who would be deciding what the "true" definitions are? Even dictionaries from the same language don't always agree as they are curated by people often from within a single culture and within a generation or two age gap - and that doesn't take into account translating & borrowing to/from other languages.

    Language is a tool, and like all human tools it is only useful if it is effective. If the words are communicating the meaning and intent, then the language however it is being used is effective - even if clumsy or unconventional. And it is precisely because language can be manipulated/utilized for various intents that it is important to verify what a particular person's intent and meaning are in order to clarify misunderstandings.

  • kendrayk74kendrayk74

    @kendrayk74 I believe that is the first time I've seen the original meaning of Platonic used correctly AND applicable to cuddling. Kudos!

    Thanks! The joy of liberal arts education.

  • DaveLaughsDaveLaughs

    Unfortunately for dear old Plato, his namesake when applied to the term "Platonic love" does not mean anything close to the many definitions given in the classic dialogue on Love.

    We use it to exclusively mean "non-sexual".

    That's the definition that sticks and in this context, the one that matters the most.

  • LilyAnneNovaLilyAnneNova
    edited May 19

    @cuddlefaery I fundamentally disagree that definitions are never fact. While language naturally evolves to create new words, it shouldn't devolve to erase precision. In fields like science and law, definitions are absolutely facts—a triangle factually has three sides, and water is factually H2O. If we treat these as mere opinions, the systems crash.

    Definitions are the shared consensus—the 'rules of the game'—that make communication possible. If everyone has their own personal definition for fundamental words, we lose our objective baseline, language becomes meaningless, and we end up just talking past each other.

    A person can say the same sentence with different intonations and have the intent and meaning change. That’s why it’s difficult to understand intent from text. Any simple sentence like “I didn’t say I wanted hot coffee” could have multiple meanings or intent depending on how it’s said. Tone can change the meaning and the intent of a sentence, but it can only do that because the definitions of the individual words are rock-solid, static facts.

    The problems people have here typically aren’t caused by differing opinions of the definitions of such words, but problems with boundaries. If you know, you know

    Idiocracy, I feel like we’re headed towards this future all the time.

  • SunsetSnugglesSunsetSnuggles

    I didn't read anyone else's reply yet, so I could write without influence...

    What is your definition of "cuddling"?
    Two people being physically close, caring, and comforting with each other. Most often laying down, one or both arms around each other, head in lap, spooning, etc. Could be as simple as walking hand in hand or having an arm linked while meandering. Could be sitting leaning into the others' chest, or being held from behind. Sitting side by side without any physical contact does not count.

    What is your definition of "platonic"?
    Friendly. Non-romantic. Non-sexual. Without ulterior motives. Not seeking a relationship. Not looking to hook up. Not attempting to turn on. Not attempting to get off. Not hoping for more! Honest intent to just be friends.

    What is your definition of "platonic cuddling"?
    Doing the former while adhering to the latter. 😁

    ~ Sunset Snuggles

    🫂 Enthusiast 🏞 Travel Junkie 📷 Shutter Bug

Sign In or Register to comment.