Results 1 to 40 of 52

Thread: Professional cuddler

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Serious Left-Static Negativist Eliza Thomason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    eastern U.S.
    TIM
    ENFp, IEE
    Posts
    3,673
    Mentioned
    378 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aquagraph View Post
    Is Eliza like the Mirror Maritsa? Maybe she's the only IEE and Maritsa is the only IEE and they combine their powers to point out SEEs.
    LOL.

    Quote Originally Posted by 1981slater View Post
    WHY NOT???
    I was going to ask if you seriously want to know, but I will just answer as if you do.

    My answer is not politically or culturally acceptable, so go away if opposing opinions incense you.

    IMO, the cuddler's behavior is unchaste. Yes, even though she is not having sex with them. Its a turn-off to me. Its unethical. And i like to think that IEEs are more ethical. We are an ethical type after all. But today chastity is seen as valueless, and only sexual indulgence has value, so many scorn even the word "chaste". But the fact is, it has great value.

    Here is my own story and I don't tell it to preach to anyone. Its just about a choice I made, my personal decision.

    It includes references to God and His ways, and even sin! So if that turns you off, skip this!

    It is a long story of my thoughts and feelings, so if thats not your cup of tea, skip it!

    I have lived with chastity for many years and its only recently I can see the fruit of it. It was often very, very hard to choose to be chaste. I think as a sx subtype particularly so. Particularly since I avoided even "platonic" relations with a man, by my own choice, because I was not in a position to marry, and felt in my loneliness the temptation for me to be unchaste would be too great. Sometimes living this life when I felt lonely made me feel numb, yet I chose it because I was fully convinced this was my way for me to live God's ways, and I had complete faith that "Our ways are not God's ways" and that God's ways are best, and that God is not mocked. That means if I chose to live God's way, no matter how it felt today, in the end, someday, I would see its reward, because if in fact "our ways" (succumbing to our natural desires instead of disciplining them) are better than God's, then God certainly could rightfully be mocked.

    (That sin is enjoyable not withstanding. Of course it is, or we wouldn't indulge.)

    So in my loneliest times there was no one to snuggle with. In my bad marriage which I was firmly faithful to, I came to a point of facing the reality of an entire lifetime without snuggling, or, bleakly, even anyone to enjoy a cup of coffee with me. And at the point of facing this I nearly fell into debilitating despair. But I took this despair to God and because of that I learned how very real His comfort is. And to have learned that makes everything that proceeded it that caused me to learn it completely worth it!

    That is why I know that Priests and Religious, if they want to keep their vows to chastity, can truly do this. It is not humanly possible - so, yes, those who are outraged that the Church would expect this of a priest have a true point. However, with God's grace, it truly is.

    For anyone familiar with the Bible, this is very much what Jesus means when He said it is harder for a rich man to get into Heaven than a camel to go through the eye of a needle. "How then can ANYONE get to Heaven?!" asked his disciples. Jesus answered that "With God, all things are possible".

    So I intended to live this way the rest of my life, and considered joining a religious order someday when my son got established in his life. I did not expect to fall very suddenly and quite completely in love with my SLI that day I met him after years of writing him. When we got together 3 months later, after so many years, I got to snuggle. Obviously I like to write, but I cannot even put into words what that is like, and I won't even try. But it is powerfully bonding, and I continually feel such gratitude that I did not snuggle with anyone else. It is so bonding that it keeps us together when we are apart months at a time, and as we face some serious, time-consuming challenging practical obstacles that we need to overcome in order to be together.

    I am so grateful now that that bonding was reserved all for SLI, and no one else. Having waited makes it better! I can only describe it as being like eating a taste of very fine food after a very long fast. Only when you are truly hungry can you appreciate the subtleties of the food.

    Of course it doesn't stop there and desire makes it seem impossible to stop at "just snuggling" so that's the ongoing challenge we face now. And we aren't perfect. But we know how to do the impossible: we need God's help.

    So, back to this professional snuggler. In my opinion, she is wasting her gift spreading it far and wide, and for a price, too. It takes away from the preciousness of the one-on-one, with one she would love someday. She is in fact selling her body and her intimacy, and even though it falls far short of prostitution, it is on that continuum. According to God's law, prostitution is wrong. And IMO, since all of God's laws are written in our hearts, that's why it offends most people. Yes, its not politically or culturally acceptable to be offended by prostitution, however the fact is most people are offended at the thought of themselves being a prostitute, even if they advocate for others to, sort of like the usual attitude towards abortion ["Well, I would never, but others can if they want!"].

    So her snuggle-intimately-with-anyone is a turn-off to me but I would never be one of those who send her scourging emails telling her so. Because I can only assume she is doing what her [uninformed] conscience tells her is a way that is okay. But I know that our ways are not God's ways. I know that I am blessed to know the reality that "There is a way which seemeth right unto man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.-Proverbs 14:12 and doing what God says is wrong leads to kinds of deaths, deaths of goods that God intended for us to have.

    He designed sexual intimacy and He knows what we should do to have the best kind. The best kind is in love, not lust, and the best kind is exclusive. Not only because he designed our bodies that way [and our bodies suffer when exposed to to many lovers, as it is against His design, and our bodies cannot take it physically, and disease results] but also doing opposite of what He says robs us of the joy of intimacy. Our hearts aren't designed to enjoy loving intimacy with that many people. That's my thought, and I am convinced its true, particularly as my experience confirms it.

    And for those who have chosen a completely other way of life, against God's ways, damaging their hearts and bodies with intimacy with many people, there is hope for you, too, to enjoy love in the fullness that God intended, as His forgiveness for our errors is complete, and there is always a new beginning.

    If anyone has seen Mel Gibson's The Passion, when Jesus, bloodied and exhausted, greets His mother on the Way to the Cross, and He says, "See, Mother? I make all things new." This is what He meant. He does make all things new.

    Remember God does not love any of us any bit less for choosing to do it our way instead of His (if He did that would make him unjust, since He gave us the choice of free will. And He is perfectly just!). He only grieves for what we have lost, since He loves us and wants the best for us.

    I venture to say He loves the transgressor more, as in the story of the lost sheep. He restores. Just as He restored Mary of Magdala, after years of prostitution, He forgave her, and healed her, and renewed her, and she was made so new that only months (or a year or so, we don't know exactly) after living completely immersed in a life of mortal sin He told her always-chaste sister Martha that her sister Mary "has exceeded you in loving". And He, Who is Love, favored she whom He praised for her love with being the first to see Him when He raised Himself from dead!
    Last edited by Eliza Thomason; 11-12-2012 at 02:33 PM.

  2. #2
    Kim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    TIM
    IEE e7 783 sx so
    Posts
    7,018
    Mentioned
    423 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post

    IMO, the cuddler's behavior is unchaste. Yes, even though she is not having sex with them. Its a turn-off to me. Its unethical. And i like to think that IEEs are more ethical. We are an ethical type after all. But today chastity is seen as valueless, and only sexual indulgence has value, so I realize that many scorn even the word chaste. But the fact is, it has great value.
    "Ethical" in socionics has nothing do do with morals or being in any shape or form "chaste" or "pure" or "non-transgressive." I can respect your choices regarding chastity, but your attitude towards sex and moral standing should not determine other people's types. I don't like to be hugged by strangers, so this could never be something I would do, but I don't think that is type-related either. I do think the world would be a better place with more snuggleries. <3
    For some reason I think SEI when watching the video, but I can't really pinpoint why.
    “Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
    ― Anais Nin

  3. #3
    Serious Left-Static Negativist Eliza Thomason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    eastern U.S.
    TIM
    ENFp, IEE
    Posts
    3,673
    Mentioned
    378 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim View Post
    "Ethical" in socionics has nothing do do with morals .
    Really? Because it seems an ethical type does spend some particular time reflecting on what their morals are.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim View Post
    or being in any shape or form "chaste" or "pure" or "non-transgressive.".
    I agree

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim View Post
    I can respect your choices regarding chastity, but your attitude towards sex and moral standing should not determine other people's types..
    Yes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim View Post
    I don't like to be hugged by strangers, so this could never be something I would do, but I don't think that is type-related either..
    And I sort of think that is related to IEE, in a like way that NF makes us a more introverted-appearing "E," NF makes us feel and think on all that's related to the hug so strongly that we are selective in that indulgence. Just a thought.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim View Post
    I do think the world would be a better place with more snuggleries. <3
    For some reason I think SEI when watching the video, but I can't really pinpoint why.
    We differ on the I-E on what we call her but the SEEs I know can appear quite demure when the situation calls for it. She has a camera pointed at her recording her for the local news and by this point her she has been made well aware that some people feel extremely strongly that she is doing something very wrong. So she has subdued the strength of her opinion that it took to set up this business, and is presenting it a bit carefully. (That's just my non-expert opinion.)

    The one SEI I know, whom I know quite well, puts all her energies into JUST serving her family in an intimate, involved way. Also my SLI is an "I" and he serves only his family in an intimate, involved way. Not strangers. So that is why I am thinking SEE rather than SEI for Miss Snuggery.

  4. #4
    Decadent Charlatan Aquagraph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Continental Vinnland
    TIM
    OmniPoLR
    Posts
    3,961
    Mentioned
    127 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    LOL.


    I was going to ask if you seriously want to know, but I will just answer as if you do.

    My answer is not politically or culturally acceptable, so go away if opposing opinions incense you.

    IMO, the cuddler's behavior is unchaste. Yes, even though she is not having sex with them. Its a turn-off to me. Its unethical. And i like to think that IEEs are more ethical. We are an ethical type after all. But today chastity is seen as valueless, and only sexual indulgence has value, so many scorn even the word "chaste". But the fact is, it has great value.

    Here is my own story and I don't tell it to preach to anyone. Its just about a choice I made, my personal decision.

    It includes references to God and His ways, and even sin! So if that turns you off, skip this!

    It is a long story of my thoughts and feelings, so if thats not your cup of tea, skip it!

    I have lived with chastity for many years and its only recently I can see the fruit of it. It was often very, very hard to choose to be chaste. I think as a sx subtype particularly so. Particularly since I avoided even "platonic" relations with a man, by my own choice, because I was not in a position to marry, and felt in my loneliness the temptation for me to be unchaste would be too great. Sometimes living this life when I felt lonely made me feel numb, yet I chose it because I was fully convinced this was my way for me to live God's ways, and I had complete faith that "Our ways are not God's ways" and that God's ways are best, and that God is not mocked. That means if I chose to live God's way, no matter how it felt today, in the end, someday, I would see its reward, because if in fact "our ways" (succumbing to our natural desires instead of disciplining them) are better than God's, then God certainly could rightfully be mocked.

    (That sin is enjoyable not withstanding. Of course it is, or we wouldn't indulge.)

    So in my loneliest times there was no one to snuggle with. In my bad marriage which I was firmly faithful to, I came to a point of facing the reality of an entire lifetime without snuggling, or, bleakly, even anyone to enjoy a cup of coffee with me. And at the point of facing this I nearly fell into debilitating despair. But I took this despair to God and because of that I learned how very real His comfort is. And to have learned that makes everything that proceeded it that caused me to learn it completely worth it!

    That is why I know that Priests and Religious, if they want to keep their vows to chastity, can truly do this. It is not humanly possible - so, yes, those who are outraged that the Church would expect this of a priest have a true point. However, with God's grace, it truly is.

    For anyone familiar with the Bible, this is very much what Jesus means when He said it is harder for a rich man to get into Heaven than a camel to go through the eye of a needle. "How then can ANYONE get to Heaven?!" asked his disciples. Jesus answered that "With God, all things are possible".

    So I intended to live this way the rest of my life, and considered joining a religious order someday when my son got established in his life. I did not expect to fall very suddenly and quite completely in love with my SLI that day I met him after years of writing him. When we got together 3 months later, after so many years, I got to snuggle. Obviously I like to write, but I cannot even put into words what that is like, and I won't even try. But it is powerfully bonding, and I continually feel such gratitude that I did not snuggle with anyone else. It is so bonding that it keeps us together when we are apart months at a time, and as we face some serious, time-consuming challenging practical obstacles that we need to overcome in order to be together.

    I am so grateful now that that bonding was reserved all for SLI, and no one else. Having waited makes it better! I can only describe it as being like eating a taste of very fine food after a very long fast. Only when you are truly hungry can you appreciate the subtleties of the food.

    Of course it doesn't stop there and desire makes it seem impossible to stop at "just snuggling" so that's the ongoing challenge we face now. And we aren't perfect. But we know how to do the impossible: we need God's help.

    So, back to this professional snuggler. In my opinion, she is wasting her gift spreading it far and wide, and for a price, too. It takes away from the preciousness of the one-on-one, with one she would love someday. She is in fact selling her body and her intimacy, and even though it falls far short of prostitution, it is on that continuum. According to God's law, prostitution is wrong. And IMO, since all of God's laws are written in our hearts, that's why it offends most people. Yes, its not politically or culturally acceptable to be offended by prostitution, however the fact is most people are offended at the thought of themselves being a prostitute, even if they advocate for others to, sort of like the usual attitude towards abortion ["Well, I would never, but others can if they want!"].

    So her snuggle-intimately-with-anyone is a turn-off to me but I would never be one of those who send her scourging emails telling her so. Because I can only assume she is doing what her [uninformed] conscience tells her is a way that is okay. But I know that our ways are not God's ways. I know that I am blessed to know the reality that "There is a way which seemeth right unto man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.-Proverbs 14:12 and doing what God says is wrong leads to kinds of deaths, deaths of goods that God intended for us to have.

    He designed sexual intimacy and He knows what we should do to have the best kind. The best kind is in love, not lust, and the best kind is exclusive. Not only because he designed our bodies that way [and our bodies suffer when exposed to to many lovers, as it is against His design, and our bodies cannot take it physically, and disease results] but also doing opposite of what He says robs us of the joy of intimacy. Our hearts aren't designed to enjoy loving intimacy with that many people. That's my thought, and I am convinced its true, particularly as my experience confirms it.

    And for those who have chosen a completely other way of life, against God's ways, damaging their hearts and bodies with intimacy with many people, there is hope for you, too, to enjoy love in the fullness that God intended, as His forgiveness for our errors is complete, and there is always a new beginning.

    If anyone has seen Mel Gibson's The Passion, when Jesus, bloodied and exhausted, greets His mother on the Way to the Cross, and He says, "See, Mother? I make all things new." This is what He meant. He does make all things new.

    Remember God does not love any of us any bit less for choosing to do it our way instead of His (if He did that would make him unjust, since He gave us the choice of free will. And He is perfectly just!). He only grieves for what we have lost, since He loves us and wants the best for us.

    I venture to say He loves the transgressor more, as in the story of the lost sheep. He restores. Just as He restored Mary of Magdala, after years of prostitution, He forgave her, and healed her, and renewed her, and she was made so new that only months (or a year or so, we don't know exactly) after living completely immersed in a life of mortal sin He told her always-chaste sister Martha that her sister Mary "has exceeded you in loving". And He, Who is Love, favored she whom He praised for her love with being the first to see Him when He raised Himself from dead!
    "A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I permit no women to teach or have authority over men, she is to keep silent." 1 Timothy 2:9-12
    “I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in — and the West in general — into an unbearable hell and a choking life. - Osama bin Laden

  5. #5
    Serious Left-Static Negativist Eliza Thomason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    eastern U.S.
    TIM
    ENFp, IEE
    Posts
    3,673
    Mentioned
    378 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aquagraph View Post
    "A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I permit no women to teach or have authority over men, she is to keep silent." 1 Timothy 2:9-12
    Aquagraph, Thank you for sharing.

  6. #6
    . willekeurig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,506
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    Having waited makes it better!
    Waited for what? What additional value does waiting bring to an activity? I was probably a few years older than the average person before I snuggled with anyone. Do you think this means it was better for me than for the average person?
    How how could you possibly know it was better that you "waited", when you don't have any experience on what it would've been like if you hadn't done se? Why do you think the experience would be the same for everyone else?

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    I can only describe it as being like eating a taste of very fine food after a very long fast. Only when you are truly hungry can you appreciate the subtleties of the food.
    If you wait for too long you might die of malnutrition.
    Quote Originally Posted by 1981slater View Post
    Axis of Evil: Iran, Iraq, North Korea and Agarina
    Quote Originally Posted by Maritsa Darmandzhyan
    Agarina does not like human beings; she just wants a pretty boy toy.
    Johari Nohari

  7. #7
    Serious Left-Static Negativist Eliza Thomason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    eastern U.S.
    TIM
    ENFp, IEE
    Posts
    3,673
    Mentioned
    378 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agarina View Post
    Waited for what? What additional value does waiting bring to an activity? I was probably a few years older than the average person before I snuggled with anyone. Do you think this means it was better for me than for the average person?.
    Maybe!
    How how could you possibly know it was better that you "waited", when you don't have any experience on what it would've been like if you hadn't done se? .[/QUOTE] Waited to share any kind of intimacy until I was sure it was the kind of love I wanted to keep for always. Til I felt that SLI was God's will for my life.

    As to the value of waiting, well, waiting to pick the fruit until it is fully ripened is valuable, for example. Waiting to enjoy the flower in full bloom and not pulling the tight bud open because you cannot wait to see. Waiting until hearts grow, and love is sure, until intimacy also has value.

    As to waiting when you know you are in love and are completely sure you are going to marry and still waiting to have sex I couldn't tell you, I never followed that one through yet, and I am only trying now and cannot tell you the reward in that. Better is the end of a thing than the beginning thereof. Other than a clear conscience, a very wonderful freeing thing just in itself, I can only think of relief on that day when it finally arrives? We will see if it means even more.

    As to how would I know, well, since husband was pretty much done with contact pretty much as soon as he wedding was over, and it was a long marriage, followed by a long period of being alone-on-purpose, that's why I know about waiting. But before my husband, I was a lot more willing to be affectionate even if I was not in love, just feeling loving. And I was with my husband completely before I married. Although Christian (Evangelical, then) I felt justified since I intended to marry him, and I couldn't find it in the Bible that you need a "piece of paper" if you were already "married in your heart", as I put it. Now I am Catholic and we do have a clear distinction. Its just not a marriage until the Priest marries you. And its hard since I am married in my heart to my SLI... and patience it not innate with me, its something I have to put on. But this too shall pass...

    Quote Originally Posted by Agarina View Post
    Why do you think the experience would be the same for everyone else? .
    I just do. Probably because I feel the lovely wonder of it had a lot to do with the long dry spell before it. And my SLI also, thankfully, had the same long dry spell for the same sort of reason. We are both so sure of each other, too. It makes it so easy, so compelling.

    Quote Originally Posted by Agarina View Post
    If you wait for too long you might die of malnutrition.
    I actually was afraid of that. I had this fear also that my determination to avoid that way of thinking would make me unable to think that way. Like I would turn myself into some kind of freak. I just had to trust God with that fear. And instead, to my surprise, it made it stronger, clearer, more compelling. I guess that's why I think it would work that way for others. Just sharing my experience.

  8. #8
    escaping anndelise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    WA
    TIM
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp
    Posts
    6,359
    Mentioned
    215 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    My answer is not politically or culturally acceptable
    What matters here is whether your typing of the girl is socionically relevant.
    That is completely different than being politically, culturally, or even religiously acceptable. (there are, after all, more religious beliefs than your own.)

    IMO, the cuddler's behavior is unchaste. Yes, even though she is not having sex with them. Its a turn-off to me. Its unethical. And i like to think that IEEs are more ethical. We are an ethical type after all.
    as Kim said, Socionics' "ethics" is not the same thing as (christian) morals.

    Socionics ethics means information regarding the psychological and emotional impact on a person's psyche. In other words, how is an action, memory, thought, etc impacting the person psychologically.

    In the OP's particular focus, how are people being psychologically impacted by not having access to basic human touch. The same touch that parents and children have. The same touch that close friends have. etc. To need that basic sense of physical connection, but being unable to meet it often leads to depression, suicidal thoughts/actions, social anxiety, anger, and other negative emotions/thoughts/actions. As well as how are people being psychologically impacted when they have access to that basic human touch? Those anxieties, depressions, anger, etc become transformed into feeling connected, higher self-esteem, sense of worth, more enjoyment out of life, and may lead to interacting in a more intimate manner (intimate does not mean sexual, here), etc.

    Some people pay for psychologists to help them work through emotionally and psychologically negative issues. Some people seek out their priest in an enclosed box so they can bare their souls to someone they deem safe. What the girl in the OP is offering serves a similar purpose, and assists with similar needs...that of helping to psychologically and emotionally support another person.

    This ends the portion that dealt with socionics ethics, and thus ends my post that was in response to Eliza's post.

    -----
    So, with that part taken care of, I'll look to see what else may be socionically related.

    Fj (stereo)types ignore information regarding their counter F element, typically because that other element interferes with what they are trying to do. FeXi ignores/dismisses Fi related info. FiXe ignores/dismisses Fe related info. I think that it's safe to say that this girl's service makes use of both Fi & Fe info. So an ethical irrational type.

    By similar token, Sp (stereo)types ignore/dismiss information regarding their counter S element. SiXe ignores Se, SeXi ignores Si. So, is this girl valuing Si while subduing Se? Or is she valuing Se while subduing Si? Is this girl's service providing Dynamic S (Si) or Static S (Se)? Does her service require the extensive use of info regarding the concrete aspects of the person, an object, an idea, etc? Or does it require extensive use of info regarding the interactional aspects between two or more people (herself and her client), objects, ideas, etc?

    Imo, Her service requires the use of sensory based interactions and sensory dynamic information. The static concrete sensory aspects of the person, place, etc do not play much if any role in the service she provides. As such, I vote she is Si valuing with subdued Se. Though, I could accept arguments that this service may be linked with Si role.

    This leads me to think NeFi, SiFe, and maybe NiFe.

    To know more I'd have to spend time reading/watching anything this girl, herself, has written/done/said rather than what a sensationalist reporter decided to keep in the edited version of the 'report'.
    IEE 649 sx/sp cp

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •