Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I first learned of this via an MSN blurb and checked it out.
The reason I post this in the Relationships forum is because I once had a friend some years back who was a call girl for a fairly upscale clientele. One of the things she told me was that during the short time she'd participated in this she'd been often very surprised at the number of men who had purchased her time solely for the purpose of things like dinner dates, conversation and companionship, that there were occasions when sex wasn't even involved. She said despite the fact that she'd been raised to view men and their alleged habits and mindset one way, this had changed her thinking drastically.
When I look at this I see a real NEED, as has the woman who is attempting to capitalize on it; however, I see what she's doing as potentially therapeutic for a relative few and potentially damaging for a far larger number.
I'm a snuggler. I am most definitely a snuggler, a cuddler, a hand-holder, a fanny-patter, a winker, a kisser, a forehead-toucher, a nuzzler, a nose-rubber, a hair-stroker, a hugger from all angles, an ear-blower, an intimate whisperer. I love touch. If I had such a partner in my life I would LOVE the chance to lay my head in a lap during a movie and drift away as she stroked my hair.
What I find myself wondering is what anyone thinks of this woman's approach and how it could be either helpful or damaging. Helpful, I would think, for the obvious reasons IF the person seeking this is otherwise healthy. However, if otherwise healthy I would expect that the majority would be in healthy relationships.
Or perhaps a relationship which is otherwise beneficial BUT lacking in this particular kind of intimacy.
However, where I see potential damage lies within the fact that cuddling, snuggling... these are highly intimate acts of comfort not merely based on physical presence but belonging and security. These feelings tend to heighten feelings of affection.
If there are men or women who are seeking those things because they are missing in their lives, I would foresee these people becoming attached to this tiny, very attractive woman as a figure representative of those feelings -- and thereby further damaging these people by heightening their sense that these things are elsewise lacking in their lives.
I would foresee others being labeled as lacking these qualities in quite the same capacity and therefore never quite measuring up.
This is, obviously, a thing one would attribute to people already damaged by a lack of affection or attachment in their lives, but then wouldn't that be most people who would possibly seek such a service?
I dont want to sound like Sigmund Freud here, but ive thought about this subject before and i truly believe that the level of your snuggle-needness comes directly from the amount of affection you received from your mother during childhood. To be perfectly clear, since these needs differ from indvidual to individual, it would be the amount of affection received from your mother during childhood years versus your individual needs. I believe that those persons in whos lives those needs were never met when growing up, are more sunggly in their adult lives. I dont see anything wrong with this woman providing or capitolizing on this type of service, although it is most definitely only a temporary fix. Do not know enough about psychology to theorize on how it would impact a person in a long run, but if I were to guess - it would not be too damaging. Interesting post.
I dont want to sound like Sigmund Freud here, but ive thought about this subject before and i truly believe that the level of your snuggle-needness comes directly from the amount of affection you received from your mother during childhood. To be perfectly clear, since these needs differ from indvidual to individual, it would be the amount of affection received from your mother during childhood years versus your individual needs. I believe that those persons in whos lives those needs were never met when growing up, are more sunggly in their adult lives. I dont see anything wrong with this woman providing or capitolizing on this type of service, although it is most definitely only a temporary fix. Do not know enough about psychology to theorize on how it would impact a person in a long run, but if I were to guess - it would not be too damaging. Interesting post.
You may just have something there....
I know that growing up, my parents never showed any affection to us kids, or each other....
A long time ago I read an article about "love lite." Basically, it was about glorified male-female friendships where they'd pop in a movie and snuggle on the couch like a couple while watching it, maybe even sleep in the same bed, but that's as far as it went, like a FWB without the sex.
That sounds a lot better, and safer, than paying some stranger to cuddle you.
Better yet, get a dog. Petting an animal will lower your blood pressure without the drama humans can create.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ascension2012
I dont want to sound like Sigmund Freud here, but ive thought about this subject before and i truly believe that the level of your snuggle-needness comes directly from the amount of affection you received from your mother during childhood. To be perfectly clear, since these needs differ from indvidual to individual, it would be the amount of affection received from your mother during childhood years versus your individual needs. I believe that those persons in whos lives those needs were never met when growing up, are more sunggly in their adult lives. I dont see anything wrong with this woman providing or capitolizing on this type of service, although it is most definitely only a temporary fix. Do not know enough about psychology to theorize on how it would impact a person in a long run, but if I were to guess - it would not be too damaging. Interesting post.
I don't see the correlation. People who were severely neglected as kids generally do not feel comfortable with a whole lot of touchy-feeliness as adults, regardless of what a shrink later tells them their needs are.
Even in plain ol' stodgy homes, where there is love but not a whole lot of hugging, the kids generally will not be mushpots when they get older. People who weren't touched a lot as kids often don't want to be as adults, or need to be. It's foreign to them and makes them feel uncomfortable. I think that to some extent, the need is learned.
My wife & I are BIG believers in snuggling. But to hire yourself out to snuggle seems dangerous.
In the article it said people are in the house for her safety, but I can't see that mattering much. I figure in two years she'll be dead OR out of this business, whether as a financial bust OR for safety reasons.
I dont want to sound like Sigmund Freud here, but ive thought about this subject before and i truly believe that the level of your snuggle-needness comes directly from the amount of affection you received from your mother during childhood. To be perfectly clear, since these needs differ from indvidual to individual, it would be the amount of affection received from your mother during childhood years versus your individual needs. I believe that those persons in whos lives those needs were never met when growing up, are more sunggly in their adult lives. I dont see anything wrong with this woman providing or capitolizing on this type of service, although it is most definitely only a temporary fix. Do not know enough about psychology to theorize on how it would impact a person in a long run, but if I were to guess - it would not be too damaging. Interesting post.
Not true. My parents (mother in particular) were (are) workaholics and went back to work after 6 weeks of maternity leave. I was never given much affection, we never kissed, hugged or said "I love you" in my household. Crying and showing emotion was shown as a weakness. I am not a cuddler and am not very affectionate in my adult life. I mirrored their actions rather then tried to fill some "void". My brother is the same way.
I don't see the correlation. People who were severely neglected as kids generally do not feel comfortable with a whole lot of touchy-feeliness as adults, regardless of what a shrink later tells them their needs are.
Even in plain ol' stodgy homes, where there is love but not a whole lot of hugging, the kids generally will not be mushpots when they get older. People who weren't touched a lot as kids often don't want to be as adults, or need to be. It's foreign to them and makes them feel uncomfortable. I think that to some extent, past infancy, the need is learned.
This is a great deal like rape scenarios, where the aftermath goes one way severely OR the other severely -- a person either completely (or almost) renouncing touch for a while (however long, perhaps for an extended period) OR a person now seeking loads of sexual contact for varying psychological reasons.
I was brought up with virtually no parental or sibling intimacy and I am VERY much into it. On the other hand I've known people who were in non-touching households who are much as you describe and do not care for it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
