Closetted emotions

Michelle Malkin has a problem with what people call "Soft America." "Soft America" is one of those things I actually dislike for the most part myself, simply because of how boring and sappy it all is. Lewis Black made fun of "Soft America" when it interfered with the Olympics: "The Americans are showing the world we like to cry alot. NBC is constantly interrupting the sports with sob stories about how somebody overcame cancer/a broken leg/a dead pet/a brown thumb to finally make it as an Olympian. Who cares?" (Paraphrase, obviously). This, IMO, along with many other criticisms of "Soft America" are completely valid, as even most of the dark comedies are wussified by the ending (see Death to Smoochie).

Michelle Malkin's most recent criticism of "Soft America" is a new phenomenon of cuddling parties. Washington Post had an article about cuddling parties (where Mrs. Malkin heard about them), and I'll do a small summary because it is a lengthy article. Two people who are self-proclaimed sex experts (the main guy is a former bartender) have decided to hold parties where guests arrive paying $30, $20 if you do it with a friend, in order to cuddle with a stranger. They change into PJs (no nudity allowed) and just hug and even set cuddle limitations. No sex is allowed, so you can't really have any expectations of that going around. People have this, according to the holders, because people are "touch-deprived."

Mrs. Malkin has a problem with this, as she thinks it is completely immature and self-indulgent. She considers cuddling groping, but makes no mention of the subtext that the most groping people do is a back or foot massage, according to the article. Replacing "Cuddle" with "Grope" also gives way to sexual feelings, given the proper form of the two definitions. The side of these people she doesn't see is that they are probably hard-edged people when not in an apartment. One is an exotic dancer, which means that generally it would be no problem for her to pick up guys at a bar, but it doesn't mean the guys won't be sleasy/skeasy/gross. Here, she doesn't have to worry about drool marks on her dress as her date picks up his jaw from the floor long enough to make lewd, inappropriate comments.

Most of the people at these parties are probably the same, given that it seemed to be a very high girl to guy ratio. The one skeaze factor I will admit is that the male thrower of these events probably knew this, but he still isn't having sex at these parties. This is merely because of the scientifically proven fact that women are much more prone to touch than men. Alot of the people who are there probably are single with some desire for a mate, but either a confidence problem (husky male), an attitude problem, or a generaly sense of dating malaise blocks these people from having a serious relationship. And, so, they want to feel needed and hugged and what-have-you, if only for a couple of hours. The rest of the time, they are probably self-sufficient people. In fact, I was generally surprised that there was an engaged couple at the party, and I think they are the only couple I will think is almost self-indulgent. But, then, they were not looking for hook-ups either.

As a result, I challenge Mrs. Malkin not to hug, kiss, fuck, or otherwise cuddle/"grope" her husband (or anybody else, including her children) for 3 months. No pecks on the cheek. Don't sleep in the same bed, or if you do, do it a la The Brady Bunch where you have your own side of the bed and it is a seemingly platonic relationship. Try it for three months, then come back and tell me that these people are self-indulgent in a 9/10 (pre-9/11 for the slower ones) mentality. ;-)

Me, I think this points to cracks in society that have long since been evident. A general lack of personal interaction, a desire for everybody to be emotionally and physically self-sufficient. And, as animals and human beings, this is virtually impossible. But, is it worth a try?