On Cuddling

[rowyn]

kelloggs2066 put up another in his collection of cute fox pictures, and gave it the caption of "It's Nice to Have Friends".

For those of you who don't feel like clicking that link, it's a picture of four foxes cuddled into a pile.

People have a lot of different reasons for being interested in furries. This one is mine.

Snapshot:

I'm perhaps fourteen, watching a syndicated sitcom, "Alice", about a waitress in a diner. Even now, I can't tell you much about this show or why I watched it: becuase it was there, I suppose. I watched a lot of TV when I was younger.

On this particular episode, the cook is involved in a romance with a brash, gregarious woman who wears loud clothes, and loves life, and hugs everyone. The character is transitory; by the end of the episode, she will be gone.

But I watched her and I thought, That. That's what I want to be like when I grow up. The sort of person who introduces herself with a hug, and who doesn't care how strange other people think she is.

---

The first person I dated, when I was seventeen, I felt no attraction to. I dated him because I wanted someone to cuddle, someone to hold and be held by, and it seemed like the only way you got this was by having a Relationship with a member of the opposite sex. I stopped dating him after a very short time because he wanted a Relationship: love, and romance, and making-out, and all I wanted was to snuggle.

There's a rule somewhere -- an unspoken Rule and not shared by everyone -- that romance/making out/love/cuddling/sex are all the same thing. If you want to do one of those things with a given other person, then you must want the whole rest of the package, or at least be seriously considering it. I hate that rule. I've never believed in it and I've never been able to follow it. I understand that it works for some other people, and that's fine. I've got no problems with people who don't like to be touched or hugged, or who set different boundaries over what's appropriate.

What frustrates me is that it's hard to find out who belongs to which camp. The assumption is that everyone follows the Rule, and some times even asking, "Hey, do you mind if I hug you?" is considered a violation of the Rule by its followers. ("You weirdo! I'm not gay!")

Furry, as a subculture, tends to go too far in the opposite direction. The Rule in furry is almost, "Everyone likes to be touched and it's always okay", which isn't true, either.

But what I like about the fandom is that it made the topic something I could talk about. It was all right to ask. And all right to cuddle with people who were friends but would never be lovers. Cuddling could be just about cuddling, and not about anything else. For me, anyway. I doubt that was or is everyone else's experience.

I always associated this very much with the appeal of being furry -- the tactile pleasure of touching fur. Most people are much more physically affectionate with pets than they are with other humans. When I meet a strange cat or dog, I greet it by offering my hand and, if the animal and owner appear to approve, petting it. (With owners, I ask in words.) Imagine if we greeted other people on a daily basis with, "Oh! What a good person you are!" *petpetpet, scritch behind ears* "Would you like to sit in my lap?"

And if you didn't want to be petted, you could growl and hiss and the other person would back off. Would that be so bad? :)

Oh, granted, even I might find that somewhat wearying. Much as I like to cuddle my friends, I've gone through phases where I've been burnt out on it and withdrawn. And I don't feel the same way about all people, or even all my friends. Some people are just more cuddly than others.

But I do find myself wishing this was a conversation I could have with more people. Something safe to talk about, without so much awkwardness and risk of misunderstanding.

Even as I write this, I find myself wondering how well I'll be understood.

Comments

On Hugs!

[kirzen.livejournal.com]

I'm thankful certainly that I have a beloved mate who -loves- cuddling.

And on some terms knowing that the rest of the world has issues with the difference that I see between a good hug and time spent cuddling as opposed to intimate relations, foreplay and sexual gratification.

I suppose one could get all clinical and try to disect it down to some sort of behavioral habit that's passed down through one's upbringing as a result of whether or not one's parents made it clear that touching was taboo or touching was fine. I know my own parents (much to my grievance and childhood trauma) wouldn't hold me under any circumstance, so I find it very soothing indeed just to have someone nearby, I've almost no personal space whatsoever, and couldn't be happier than when I have someone (whether a stranger I know in passing, or someone I care for) curled up close against me, especially if I know it pleases them to be close.

I still remember when you were down May, and perhaps the best greeting I've ever recieved *smiles* hugs are always nice indeed, and I've never had one that felt so nice (then again, I dislike most of my relatives, which means my normal supply of non-mousie hugs is rather lack-lustre indeed) but it still warmed my heart just to get to hug for a moment.

I suppose a portion of it is wrapped up in the sexual issues of our time, we've started to make sexuality into a physical conquest. It used to be the emotional conquest of romance, the idea of treating the other person in that special manner to communicate to them your desire to be close, whether to have sex, to have children or to form the bond of marriage (and even in the past not necessarily all three at once). But these days the conquest has moved into the physical, romance dies more quickly in most cases, and what's developed is a sense for seduction, short skirts, makeup, muscular bodies, scents, confidence. Unfortunately its made us a society that's both shallow and carefully withdrawn, something in the wiring of our society says that touching is meant for three things: soothing someone's hurts, greeting family, and sexual intimacy. (I'll have to look into this at some point, it would be interesting to find out if there's been many studies on the history of touch, since animals seem to be far less uptight about it, it seems to be something that has developed along with higher brain function, which suggests that there is probably a history of where we decided that touch was a bad thing, and left exceptions for certain circumstances. I've a feeling it's probably something caste oriented, a dividing point in the worth of others and whom someone shouldn't be touching... but, I digress)

I certainly agree as to your reason for being interested in furries though, I suppose on some level I share it, I've -always- loved the differences I feel between animals and humans and I cherish the times when I get to spend time with a pet who shares my lack of personal space (like, finding a friendly cat to scritch, spending time at a pet store petting random cute animals or spending lazy days curled up on the couch with a snugglable, happy companion)

Now if only the furry world at large could find its bearings and find a happy medium between touching nearly everyone and everything in its rebellion against human culture, and the upright, rather anal upbringing that has lead most humans to feel that one can't -just- touch and enjoy it for what it is.

Anyhow *hugs* take care sweet May

Re: On Hugs!

[rowyn]

You know, I was thinking of my trip to Canada a great deal while I wrote this. Your household felt very much like home to me (though I cheated by bringing Brenna and thereby adding to the hominess :D ) because of the abundance of cuddliness. I remember fondly strangess saying, "OK, you can sit next to Rowyn, but only on the condition that you're going to cuddle her. I don't want any wasted May-space here." See, now, that's my idea of a vacation: 24-hour gaming AND cuddling BOTH. What more could a woman ask for? :)

On pets -- I know what you mean about ones with "no sense of personal space". When I adopted mine, I checked over all twenty or so up for adoption at the vet's, looking for the most affectionate ones there. Some cats don't like constant attention -- I didn't want to wind up with one of those. :)

I think you have an interesting point re: caste differences. There may also be an evolutionary advantage to avoiding contact: close proximity promotes the spread of disease. Not as muchof a factor nowadays, but probably significant even a century ago. I don't think that's as big a factor as other taboos, but it probably contributed to the survival of cultures that had no-touching taboos.

Re: On Hugs!

[lady-anne.livejournal.com]

I don't completely agree with you on your analysis of the 'no touching/close proximity' ideas as relates to "even a century ago".

This doesn't apply to families with money - but - in most homes the children slept 'many to a bed' - if the family could afford to segregate the boys and the girls, they were lucky.

In the rural areas (most of the country, at that time) the boys were sent to sleep in the barn when they got old enough to be a 'hazard'.

I think they had all the touching and closeness they could stand.

Re: On Hugs!

[rowyn]

That wasn't quite what I meant. I was thinking "if you could maintain personal space at all times, you would probably be healthier." I'd expect the effect of easier transmission of disease that comes from proximity to be more pronounced in the past than it is now, because modern Americans are more obsessed with personal hygiene and we have much better medical care. Er. What I'm saying is (and I may be wrong) the folks in the lower classes who lived elbow-to-elbow got diseases and died faster than the upper classes who had the luxury of being able to keep their distance from one another.

This might have contributed to the formation of a society which considered keeping one's distance a Good Thing(tm).

Or, I don't know. Perhaps as income levels rose and space was an affordable luxury, just that it was a luxury made it seem more desirable.

But I'm just randomly speculating. It does seem like American society has a very different notion of "personal space" and what constitutes "acceptable contact" from many other mammals. And other cultures have had much stronger taboos against touching other people, I think. But I really don't know what forces have shaped us to turn out the way we did. The pendulum seems to be swinging the other way now -- I think a lot more Americans are comfortable hugging and touching their friends today than was the case thirty years ago. Particularly among men.