Who Wants A Hug?!
Saturday, May 3, 2008
So, you know how Yahoo! will link fairly random news stories on their main page. The other day, I saw this one. Needless to say, I was intrigued. Still, no amount of logic can override the fact that this site looks like an invitation to a homely orgy. The ad for SugarDaddie.com doesn't help.
I mean, I understand it. It makes sense. It even reminds me of that AWESOME MOVIE (that's for you, Melin) Crash in the "we're all so disconnected from each other" thing. Yet I honestly don't know what to make of this. My brains tell me that it's true, touch does get mixed up primarily with sex (unless we're talking familial touch and ew, bad connection), but my guts tell me "....waaait a minute". And my guts are where thinking happens. Really, I don't want ugly people pawing me. Ok, ok. Maybe I'm not that shallow and it's the stranger thing that bothers me...ugly strangers.
But, I'm not a touchy-person unless it's with a significant other, then I'm all over them. I reserve it I guess. According to these hippy-dippy hugtards, that may be the problem, with me, with society. I honestly don't know. Maybe if the founders didn't look like such dillholes and this were a free event, I'd believe it more. Or maybe it's like cursing, or watching porn, the more you do it, the less "special" it becomes. Like everything, I'm sure there's a happy medium. I'm just not so sure a Cuddle Party is that medium. Here's a good middle-of-the-road article from Nerve.com.
Sadly, no Kansas events in the near future, so I may continue to be deprived of hearing "May I touch you?" from a 43 year old Dillon's night manager. Someone console me.
Lawrence.com blogs are collections of short, frequently updated posts by members of the Lawrence community. Blog writers, and comment posters, are solely responsible for what they say. (Please take the time to read our full policy.)
If you're interested in writing a blog on lawrence.com, send us a couple of sample entries.
Lymbyc Systym / This Will Destroy You / Black Christmas :: Though generally lumped in with the electronica scene, this duo's appeal extends far beyond bloopy sequencing as laptop post-rock generators ... More info
Comments
lawrence.com does not necessarily agree with comments posted below - responsibility lies with the relevant user alone. Read our full policy
Posted by Dazie (Aileen Dingus) on May 3, 2008 at 10:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Oh God I feel like I need a shower just LOOKING at those sites. *shudder*
I don't hug.* I especially don't hug strangers. I ESPECIALLY do not go looking to DELIBERATELY hug strangers.
Blech. I think I just had a heebie jeebie attack.
*close friends and family are an exception. And even then it's iffy.
Posted by DOTDOT (anonymous) on May 4, 2008 at 1:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)
cuddle puddle muddle shuttle scuttle hug shrug bug rug snug fug(?)
I can't do it.
Posted by OtherJoel (anonymous) on May 4, 2008 at 10:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The idea seems ridiculous and a little sad to me, but obviously there's a market, and if they can create a safe environment for people to get their minimum required human contact, I don't have any objection to it. I am not a touchy person by nature and I couldn't imagine participating in something like that, but I also know that people are wired differently -- some people need more affection than others, and if you don't have someone around to provide that, maybe it is helpful.
I do wonder how you manage the line between non-sexual and sexual, though. Think about it: people who don't get enough touching are cuddling and spooning? C'mon, there's bound to be some mixed signals and perhaps awkward biological functions happening in there.
Posted by godjilla (Jill Ensley) on May 4, 2008 at 2:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
OJ, yeah, I thought about that too. Apparently the mixed-signals is a good thing, since they want to teach that rejection is ok. "Erections happen" is also a motto. Honestly, I don't think it's as crackpot as it appears to be, but I think the idea of it all might be better than the practice. Like Communism, good in theory, yet impractical.
Dazie, my friends used to make fun of the way I hugged them, so I understand. I've since improved, but yeah, still not a touchy person with strangers.
Aww, c'mon Dots, no poem!?!
Posted by DOTDOT (anonymous) on May 4, 2008 at 4:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Oh!!! Erections!!
I was wondering how cuddling might excite the bowels and/or bladder to the point of embarrassment, but I figgered, you know, some people and all.
Posted by DOTDOT (anonymous) on May 4, 2008 at 5:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
No poem is just an election
avoiding this talk of erection
and cute words like cuddle
which only do muddle
a man's manly radar detection
There.
Posted by DOTDOT (anonymous) on May 4, 2008 at 5:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I was raised Catholic. Not only do we not hug, but we practice the fine art of not even looking at each other. It is an unspoken agreement enabling us to sneak out during or after communion without eye contact. Bless me, Father, for I have sinned.
In a past life I joined a protestant church. People looking at each other and smiling at each other and asking how you doing. Shaking hands (Male to male), hugging (all other combinations). I was all like what the fuck are you looking at or what's it to you or get your hands offa me bitch for a good year. I'm not sure I ever got used to it, and it was a long time ago.
Posted by godjilla (Jill Ensley) on May 4, 2008 at 5:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Thank you.
I feel better now.
BOnars. *twitter*
Posted by godjilla (Jill Ensley) on May 4, 2008 at 5:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Well, I think we just need to have a L.com Puppy Pile to get over our fears of intimacy.
I also think that my neighbors should learn a new guitar chord.
Posted by mitzibel (Misty Nuckolls) on May 4, 2008 at 6:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm the person you all hate. I hug EVERYBODY. Sober, even.
Posted by OtherJoel (anonymous) on May 4, 2008 at 6:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Ooh, are the neighbors learning "Falling Slowly"?
Posted by Dazie (Aileen Dingus) on May 4, 2008 at 8:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
DOTDOT- that must be it. Not only did Catholics not hug or look at each other, but we never discussed sex or money.
Unitarians, on the other hand, do all of that. It was kind of difficult to get used to.
Posted by ladylaw (Terry Bush) on May 5, 2008 at 9:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I am a hugger too. I can give lessons to the hug impaired. But not everyone can learn to hug - or wants to! LOL. My ex huband, God love him, hugged rarely and then always did it "side-ways" (think George Jetson's dog draping an arm over your shoulder and squeezing). I like full frontal hugs, with a pat -or two - on the back thrown in for good measure. Bill Hoyt is a champion hugger!
While the idea of anything organized just to touch strangers gives me the willies (no one should have to PAY for a simple hug), I do believe that human touch (non-sexual or sexual) is essential to good mental health. Without the right amount of touching, people get crazy.
I try to respect the boundaries set up by those who are not comfortable with touch. However, my instinct is to reach out to others, and sometimes that just means they need a hug (or I do!).
As for the Catholic thing, dot-dot, it is a critique I've heard about the church. However, in some Catholic churches, people do hold hands and then shake hands once - during the Lord's prayer and after it. But it's organized. Maybe that's the problem. Spontaneous expressions of care are more to my taste. Anything organized seems contrived.
Posted by godjilla (Jill Ensley) on May 5, 2008 at 2:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)
OJ, HA!
And this would be the shortest comment ever if I didn't just feel the need to point that out.
Posted by OtherJoel (anonymous) on May 5, 2008 at 8:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Boner was my favorite character on Growing Pains. And it just occurred to me that aside from the obvious name of Mike's pal, the show's title itself is a pun on erections. And it had Alan Thicke. Thick what? Ewwww...
I need a shower. Oh God, that could be taken the wrong way too. MAKE IT STOP!!!
Posted by DOTDOT (anonymous) on May 5, 2008 at 9:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"Taken the wrong way" could be taken the wrong way too.
Posted by Snoop (anonymous) on May 6, 2008 at 3:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I could be persuaded to hug a liberal for a dollar...
Yes I’m an evil anti social conservative capitalist pig! Sue me!
Posted by El_Borak (Bill Hoyt) on May 6, 2008 at 8:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Still trying to recoup that dollar you paid me for a hug, eh? Good luck, Snoop.
Posted by zzgoeb (anonymous) on May 7, 2008 at 8:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)
As usual I'm coming in late here...hugs are good, for good friends. The "bro pat" sucks, and don't try it on me! Handshakes only, please. The party thing goes right along with encounter groups and EST...only for Californians!!! And most importantly, when did Snoop get back!!! I've been off these board for awhile...I'll hug that bitch for free, BABY!!!
peace out my brothers and sisters!!!
zzgoebster is back....;p
Posted by godjilla (Jill Ensley) on May 7, 2008 at 11:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Jesus H. Macy, a crap-ton of new bloggers and Snoop deigns to wallow once again with the unwashed masses.
All it has to do is snow in May and we're done for.
Posted by Snoop (anonymous) on May 9, 2008 at 10:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Gawd Lardy Y'all ak like I is the anti kryst and kame back fram da dead.
So Jilla when you gonna put up your hug booth. I can use a good hug!!
Posted by OtherJoel (anonymous) on May 10, 2008 at 12:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"I could be persuaded to hug a liberal for a dollar...
Yes I’m an evil anti social conservative capitalist pig! Sue me!"
I could be persuaded to hug a conservative for two dollars (one of which will go to a warm-and-fuzzy federal social program TBD), so there's common ground, my friend. We all have a price.
Posted by godjilla (Jill Ensley) on May 10, 2008 at 12:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Ahahaha. Nice.
Post a comment
(Requires free lawrence.com registration.)