What kind of question is this? I personally think that there are too many pros on here. Most of the time you notice a new girl sign up and the next thing you know she turns pro.
@pmvines I concur. There have been points of contention about certain aspects of pros but very few that are flat out against pros. Those that are against pros seem to complain because they are unable to afford it and that someone owes it to them. I know it stinks, but some people have trouble feeding their families. If you look at things in perspective the issue is not so big. I also do not buy that argument because there are several pros that say to contact them and they will work something out. Frankly, I like having both.
Yes, I just feel you are quite disingenuous.
Lol
I wasn’t calling you disingenuous FunCartel. Incase there was any confusion.
@boomerang86 I took it as playful sarcasm as that word has been tossed around a lot.
At first I saw this post topic and thought it was kind of ridiculous. But coincidentally, just had an interesting revelation that makes me question that. Some non professionals join this site just for fun. They have zero intention of cuddling with anyone. They talk to several guys at once, waste their time, probably having a good laugh and ego boost at the idea that all these guys are competing for their attention...but in reality they never had any intention of cuddling. I suppose that makes sense when there is such a skewed ratio of men to women. but its sad that people can be so disingenuous. Oh well. next!
@melancholy A couple of friends have told me about similar experiences on dating sites, as well. Unfortunately, any online community can be prowling grounds for narcissistic types trying to find new supply for their needed ego boosts. Given everything that goes on already, I'm not surprised if it does happen here.
It's a lovely 8 am in my personal time zone, and looks like being a beautiful book-filled night. Morning, all!
Off-topic:
Oh, I don't have to strive, @boomerang86. It comes naturally. And yeah—"attractive" doesn't necessarily mean sexually attractive. But how often do you see it used any other way? Especially when talking about people? But let's say you were using "attractive" in a purely aesthetic sense.
"There are some professionals on here," you're saying, "who are very not-nice to look at (as well as many professionals who are nice to look at)."
"I just have a hard time believing someone who isn't nice to look at decided out of the blue they are going to make extra money selling platonic cuddling," you say, and we wonder what it is about someone's physical appearance, of all things, that would make them think they couldn't make it as a pro cuddler.
It's a platonic service, after all. Like therapy or massage—why should physical appearance enter into it?
Why should it be obvious that "attractive" vs. "homely" matter such a great deal to potential clients that it's actually hard to believe that a homely person would ever decide to try to provide the service?
I wonder why it's so remarkably clear to you that physical appearance is so important in choosing a pro cuddler that physically unattractive (i.e., homely) people might as well not even apply? It isn't clear to me. It seems to me that a physically unattractive person might also be very attractive in other, non-visual ways: they might have a warm and comforting personality, for instance, or be very good at making conversation.
A visually attractive physical appearance is hardly the be-all and end-all of cuddling. I find it very easy to believe that someone homely—that is, someone who isn't nice to look at—decided out of the blue they are going to make extra money selling platonic cuddling.
Why do you find it so difficult?
On-topic: As a non-pro, I welcome the pros. Even though I can't afford them, it's nice to have them here. If I ever get the money, maybe I'll hire one someday. As for me, I've said before I don't have the skill to go pro! This doesn't mean all my cuddles are free (I expect to get at least as good as I give), but at the very least I'm not going to be charging money.
My cuddles aren't worth that: I'm not so unselfish a cuddler. I still try to give as good as I get, though—so why should I be barred from the site?
I think the site's fine as it is.
There are obviously exceptions, because large numbers are involved, but this site tends to confirm the painful things that I was taught early in my life, struggled against accepting, but am coming to realize are true.
@CharlesTwisted: Experience does tend to remove illusions.
You probably shouldn't use me to confirm or disconfirm any of your biases, though—I'm an outlier. In fact I lie so far out that, according to some people, I'm not even on the humanity chart; not exactly a great example of average humanity.
@catloaf this is totally off topic but your profile pic is SO cute I love it wish you were a local pro is that tiger from calvin and hobbes?
Eh... side note.
Attractiveness is a major factor in choosing a professional cuddler. Of course, there are many different types of attractiveness. @boomerang86 contends that purely aesthetic attractiveness—being nice to look at, apart from any sexual appeal—is a major factor. This, I disagree with.
After all, I don't experience sexual attraction: if I'm attracted to someone on the basis of a photo, it really is purely aesthetic!
And so I can tell you that when sexual attraction isn't in the picture, being nice to look at isn't a major factor: other things are more important than simple visual appeal.
We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.
@melancholy Better off-topic and in public than "sliding in the DMs", LOL. Thanks for your compliment. I wish he was Hobbes That's my favourite Sunday strip comic, and I have a few of the anthologies.
Darren, you have been honest previously that you couldn’t even afford 5 dollars for a professional cuddler. So what your doing is the equivalent of criticizing someone’s order at an expensive restaurant, and contending you’d have ordered the scrod instead. You don’t have money for the scrod, or any other menu item- so it is not relevant.
@boomerang86: You're saying simple visual attractiveness is important in a cuddler—so important that it's vital in a pro. I'm saying it's not all that important in any cuddler, pro or otherwise.
What you're doing, @boomerang86, is the equivalent of ordering nyotaimori, insisting that the naked person is vital to the sushi, and getting upset at anyone who points out that sushi and sex appeal have nothing to do with one another—the whole point of sushi is the sushi, not what it's served on.
The cuddle is the point. Not the visual appeal of your buddy.
It would be nice if one day you simply quoted me instead of writing your version of what you think I said. If I told you I was innocent of a crime you’d tell the police I confessed to you.
...Are you sure, @boomerang86?
You: "I just have a hard time believing someone homely decided out of the blue they are going to make extra money selling platonic cuddling."
Implication: People who don't have visually attractive bodies don't do well as pro cuddlers.
Me: "The sexual attractiveness of a pro is absolutely a factor in how much business they get."
You: "We already covered your acknowledgement that a pro's attractiveness or lack thereof factors into how much business they get."
Implication: We both acknowledge that people choose sexually attractive pros. It's not about pure aesthetics: it's about sex.
Implication: People who aren't sexy know they're not going to get much business here.
Or do you disagree with any of the things you seem to be implying?
Thank you- appreciate you quoting instead of the Darren Cliff Notes of what you think I said. Also, did you notice above a non pro lament Catloaf not being a local pro? He thought her profile picture is cute and wishes he could book a session. That to me is normal behavior. A pro’s appearance is a factor in whether one wants to book them.
@boomerang86: Answer the question, please. Do you disagree with, for instance, the idea that people who aren't sexy know they're not going to get much business here, and that's why it's hard for you to believe they'd set up as pros?
All right. Well, you know, I really enjoy analyzing and translating things: in all languages, not just Japanese! So if you really want me to use your own words, @boomerang86, I'm pleased to oblige.
"I have a hard time believing someone homely"—stop, wait: what do you mean by 'homely'?
You're contrasting it with 'attractive', so whatever you mean by 'homely', it's the opposite of 'attractive'. What do you mean by 'attractive'?
"[I] think it is disingenuous to pretend that the attractiveness of a pro is not a factor in how much business they get"—so whatever type of attractiveness you mean, it makes people want to cuddle with whoever has it—and it's contrasted with 'homely', which means it's the opposite of either 'warm and comforting' or 'not nice to look at'.
So this type of attractiveness is either 'cold and disquieting' or 'nice to look at'.
"[Y]ou are determined to make any reference to someone’s appearance about sex." Aha! So you were referring to appearance when you said, "There are some very homely professionals on here (as well as many attractive professionals)."
Therefore: homely = not attractive in appearance; that is, not nice to look at attractive = attractive in appearance; that is, nice to look at
Returning to your earlier words: "I just have a hard time believing someone homely [that is, not nice to look at] decided out of the blue"—hold on, stop. What does 'out of the blue' mean?
Wikipedia "Out of the blue" is an informal English language idiom that describes an event that occurs unexpectedly, without any warning or preparation. It is used as an adverb. The "blue" in the phrase refers to the sky, one from which a sudden thunderstorm is unexpected.
Does anyone make career decisions "out of the blue"? I think this may be your loophole, Boomerang. It is indeed very difficult to believe that anyone would decide to set up as a cuddler without expecting that they were about to.
"I just have a hard time believing someone homely [not nice to look at] decided out of the blue they are going to make extra money selling platonic cuddling." This implies that unless you're attractive, it's hard to believe you'd think you could make extra money as a pro cuddler.
Well, why wouldn't someone homely be able to make extra money as a pro cuddler?
As I've said many times before, appearance isn't the main selling point in a cuddle: it's the physical contact with a human being who, ideally, makes you feel accepted and cared for. Someone you feel comfortable being close to, eyes open or closed. Someone you can shove playfully with your shoulder and get a playful shove back. Somebody you can practice footrubs on. Somebody you get along with personality-wise.
What does visual attractiveness have to do with it? Sure, it might be a bonus—but is it really so big a thing, so important in cuddling, that it's difficult to believe someone without it might think they could make money cuddling?
Well, I know that visual attractiveness often equals sexual attractiveness—and I know that the sexual attractiveness of a pro is absolutely a factor in how much business they get.
But homely "should not be 'interpreted' as meaning not sexually attractive." Visual attractiveness, you say, does not equal sexual attractiveness in this case. Sexual attractiveness has nothing to do with it. Homely just means 'not nice to look at; that is, not visually attractive.' Sex doesn't enter the picture here.
So... why do you think purely visual—non-sexual! purely aesthetic!—attractiveness is so important in a pro?
It really isn't, you know.
Nice bonus. Not a career-maker. Nothing to keep someone without it from setting up shop (and doing just fine)... unless visual attractiveness is tied to sexual attractiveness, in which case, well. How's a warm, comforting (but not visually/sexually attractive) person supposed to compete with that?
Edited for formatting. "Therefore:" just looks better without the bold, I think....
...And two of those paragraphs look much better with it.
Glad you’re not in my book club Darren. I’d hate to have to listen to your 4 hour rant on chapter 1.
@boomerang86: You're in a book club? The things we learn.
As the author of "Chapter 1," don't you appreciate the attention of my "4-hour rant"? Or does it reveal what you were saying a bit too plainly—and your only hope is that it's so long no one will read it?
I'd like to return for a moment to the original question posed in the thread. I’ve been a CC member for about eight months now, but this is the first time I’m commenting on a forum. Some of what I read in this thread has taken me by surprise and I wanted to share my perspective.
Unlike, apparently, most people who sign up here, I had no idea at the time I joined that there were professional cuddlers on the site, or even that such a thing existed. In fact I found myself a bit nonplussed by it at first – I envisioned CC as kind of a platonic dating/friendship site, much like the old platonic section on Craigslist pretended to be. The notion of paying for friends seemed – and still seems – off-putting.
Of course, I also foolishly didn’t understand for a long time that most members are men who want to cuddle with women. Like Darren Walker, I’m an outlier, though in a different way. I’m gay, I do experience sexual attraction, but I don’t enjoy sex. Mostly, I want to hold and be held by other men. And while I have yet to cuddle with anyone, I’ve made some promising contacts here on CC.
So even understanding how this site works, I still have no interest in looking for professionals. The idea that CC should be some sort of yellow pages for pro cuddlers is pretty much anathema to me. I hope it doesn’t change.
Addendum: even though physical attractiveness matters far less in platonic cuddling than in a sexual liaison, I don’t think most people (myself included) can completely dismiss it. After all, cuddling is a form of physical pleasure involving body contact. Most of us tend to respond differentially to different bodies, even when it’s non-erotic.
That was a well thought out first post, Marc.
My initial impression regarding the OP is that this is some sort of justification for gatekeeping and perhaps they don't want people offering for free what they are charging for, which undercuts the money coming in. I understand that position in terms of cash flow, but why would you want to deny someone access to something as basic as human contact? That may not be the case, but it is simply my initial impression.
When I arrived here, I did not even know professional cuddling existed and was not expecting it. At first, I thought it was tragic that it was monetized. However, after more consideration, I thought it did make some sort of sense and thus recovered from my initial shock. There has to be a reason someone would feel the need to pay for the service and if that's the avenue available to them, then who am I to get in the way of that?
I have a serious concern with any restrictions placed on any two consenting adults offering compassion and contact with each other if it is done in a manner where everyone is safe. If the site was limited to professionals, I likely would have never joined. My situation at the time made money extremely tight, so there just was not anything available to pay for it. Forcing us into either being a consumer or a professional seems like it would hamper the spirit of the website. Many people can benefit from a mutually beneficial encounter rather than having to choose between being a provider and being a consumer. Life isn't that simple. Relationships aren't that simple.
To be extremely blunt, doing as the OP suggests is borderline bullying. Turning away people because it doesn't fit into their paradigm of what the website should be would be a tragedy. Just because OP automatically assumed there were only professionals here does not mean everyone who shows up will as well. I know I did not. I see a very recent post above mine who also did not. While I didn't read every post, I'm sure others didn't as well. While I have yet to meet up with anyone through the website, I have hope that will change one day. I have had some great conversations with some people and it is comforting to know there are others out there in a similar situation as mine. That alone is therapeutic and should be encouraged. Making the site professionals-only would take the warmth out of it and make it far too clinical.
@DarrenWalker unsung hero of the day.
So because I did not respond to your private message missadventurous you label Darren Walker a hero? A hero for his comically absurd stance that caring about appearance when paying someone $100 dollars an hour to spend time with you is nefarious! You sure post a lot of photos of yourself for a service where appearance has no relevance. It just reaffirms to me how dishonest human beings can be when it suits their personal ambitions.
Okay, lol... So let's get a quick synopsis. I am traveling to Colorado, You viewed my profile, I responded the simple how are you? No response is fine, I just enjoy sending a friendly message to people who come to view me as I like to get to know others around my country and around the world.
My comment is based on this subject matter.
Obviously with your extreme point of view based on assumption of complete strangers, due to the fact that I agreed with the thoroughly explained act that you did make a point to say something and try to retract. Rather find insults vs. intellectual conversation to be a explanation for being correct in your narrow-minded reasoning.
If you think that is necessary to judge or be rude based on superficial facts, that, is reflection of you. Not on me, not on the site, and perhaps in the future to try and be more open-minded about the fact that we all should just stay in our OWN lane.
ALL are welcome to explore and do and be who and what they want to be and what they want to explore as a cuddler, be on any spectrum that fits the goal of platonic exploration of bio-therapy and the examination of modern boundaries and communication.
I'm sure you'll have some backwards response -- your type always does. Have a nice day and I'll be sending you positive thoughts to be open to the idea that separate does not equal better.