Is "touch starvation" a real thing?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
passion84god said:
I would do it 4900 times if I thought that it might do any good. I haven't totally lost hope for him yet because he has seemingly shown some signs of concern and sincerity at points in this conversation. At other times, he has seemed rather disingenuous. Like I said to him before, I am not out to judge him. I am just genuinely concerned for anyone who can easily dismiss Christ's resurrection from the dead because without it, we are all doomed.​
Click to expand...
That's where you've gotten wrong. By no means do I dismiss Christ's resurrection from the dead, quite the contrary, I defend it, and I vehemently debate with others who put their hope in the ascension of the soul or the rapture of the church instead.

You see, the problem here is what resurrection inevitably entails if you trace it backward - resurrection is victory over death, death is the end of suffering, suffering is the felt in hardship, persecution, misfortune, etc., that is a hard sell, which most churches don't prepare you for, often not even inform you of. Very rarely would you hear "take up the cross and follow me," that's what I'm genuinely concerned, and, believe it or not, that's where stoicism fits in. There wouldn't be market for it had the church adequately trained its congregations for the cross. You can condemn stoicism as much as you like, I have no intention to debate you on any of it, but please know that "therapy culture" and "prosperity gospel" are more harmful and misleading than any greek philosophy.
 
Lovette said:
Pfft, friend, lecture me with this next time after you scrub the toilet, mop the floor and wipe the kitchen counter, speaking of "unclean" things. I've done all those yesterday. How much less should I 'avoid' touching anyone? As much as I've not a medical degree, not qualified to treat anyone.
Click to expand...
A professor commented that my treatment of good and bad events seemed to be stoic when I expressed my Christ inspired strategy toward navigating through life's events. Enjoy your fortress of solitude, just be mindful of treating others as if they had leprosy. That is, unless your intention is to heal them.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: Snackersmom and Lynx
Mem said:
A professor commented that my treatment of good and bad events seemed to be stoic when I expressed my Christ inspired strategy toward navigating through life's events. Enjoy your fortress of solitude, just be mindful of treating others as if they had leprosy. That is, unless your intention is to heal them.
Click to expand...
I have worked with mentally handicapped adults and children , many of whom r not much more than babies in their heads . A lot of them don't get much physical contact for a variety of different reasons .
If u give a mentally handicapped person a genuine hug , the vast majority of them r over the moon and they show it too . Touch starvation is definitely real , it's also something that some people experience and others don't . We r all individuals and we r allowed to b but , I think we need to remember that what applies to us , may not apply to others .
 
  • Like
  • Pray
Reactions: Mem, seoulsearch and Snackersmom
Lovette said:
Whatever I went through, Christ has washes it all away, it no longer affects me.
Click to expand...

You say that, but your posts have classic hallmarks of a person who has been through chronic emotional abuse, neglect, or dismissal. If you are content with allowing the abuse to control you then that is your business but unfortunately you are unwittingly attempting to spread your trauma by passing it on to others, characterizing their normal human emotions as the "whining of lonely losers"

Lovette said:
Not fear, but inability, or at least inhibition. I don't even have the words in my native language to describe and articulate any emotions, let alone sharing them. And there's nobody to share anyway.
Click to expand...

Inability or inhibition to express emotions is another hallmark of past emotional abuse, neglect or dismissal. I only used the word "fear" because you did, at the end of post #116.

When I parroted back the word "fear" to you, did that trigger you? 🤔 If so no worries, no shame in that but you need to understand that even your inability to express emotions is most likely rooted in a biochemical response from years of feedback that emotions are dangerous and should not be expressed. It probably goes back to childhood.

There are ways to teach your brain that emotions are ok (and even expressable), but it will require you to be honest with yourself, and right now I don't think you are willing to do that. But if you ever want to give it a shot I'm here for it 💙

Best!
 
passion84god said:
The bold-faced part made me laugh. I have never heard it described that way before, but I suddenly feel like a laxative salesman. :giggle:

The "very subservient wives" part kind of describes my own brief experiences with Stoicism. About 7 months ago, I reached a point where I could no longer deny something I had noticed about women based on my own interactions with them over the years. Out of genuine curiosity, I searched on YouTube to see if anyone else had the same observation, and I came across a whole bunch of videos on the topic. Many of them were made by Stoics. I was familiar with the term because I knew they were mentioned in the Bible, but I honestly did not know anything about their beliefs prior to that time. I wound up watching about 20 different videos posted by people who adhered to Stoicism over about a two week span of time, but I ultimately concluded that they used a sort of mental manipulation in regard to their interactions with women. In my own heart and mind, there was no way that I could reconcile their practices with the mind of Christ or what is taught in scripture, so I stopped watching any of their videos.

As far as Lovette is concerned, I genuinely have no desire to judge him. I do know though that his Logos and the Logos described in the Bible are not the same thing, and that is but one reason why I am deeply concerned for him.​
Click to expand...

Haha well I don't think I coined the term "emotionally constipated", but I'm glad it gave you a laugh!

One thing I have noticed among adult men who adhere to stoicism is that they all seem to have gone through emotional trauma of some sort as kids. They are unable to process their own emotions so they deny them for the most part, and they don't seem to think anyone else should have any either. They generally consider anger to be an acceptable emotion as long as it it expressed by an adult male. Women and children are not allowed to express anger, when they do it automatically means they are in the wrong. This allows the stoic freedom from dealing with any complicated emotions; suppression and avoidance are the keys to peace.

I am curious what you saw in women that caused you to search for answers, if you are willing to elaborate more. I do believe a stoic can also be a Christian but they generally have a lot of inner healing to do before they can be a mature one. They generally make terrible leaders, except in the bleakest of situations where defeat is likely and emotions have to be set aside for a time, such as military campaigns.
 
On subject of touch. Have you considered the untouchables.

The dalits of India.

Think of what touch deprivation does to these people in a caste based society as India.

Or, in the UK it would be the dustman, the cockney flower seller, the great unwashed. At the time, Salvation Army rescued all those who were rejected by the mainstream Church of England. They were the outcasts, the riffraff.

I personally think faith needs to be hands on, as well as practical, and not a mere intellectual exercise. It needs to embrace those who need embracing, and refrain from embracing when the time is not to embrace. There is a time for everything.

On subject of mentally challenged/handicapped individuals, like those with Downs syndrome, they LOVE to be hugged and touched. It makes them happy. But they also need to learn appropriate boundaries. You can't go hugging everyone you see.
 
Snackersmom said:
I am curious what you saw in women that caused you to search for answers, if you are willing to elaborate more.
Click to expand...
I was hoping that nobody would ask. Because of my line of work, I am often in major retail stores, like Sam's Club and Costco, for several consecutive days or weeks. Sometimes I see a female worker there or another female salesperson who is similarly set up there that I am attracted to. When I casually approach them by attempting to strike up a simple conversation with them or to joke with them because I am attracted to them, they almost always shun me. You know. Lightning bolts coming out of their eye sockets. Angry looks on their faces. Everything in their body language screaming out to me, "Beat it, buster!" Since I still need to be in the same location with them for days or weeks after that, I do my best to completely avoid them so as to not possibly make them feel uncomfortable, especially in their own workspace. If I have to walk past them for some reason, then I make sure to not even make eye contact with them so as to not possibly cause any offense.

Here's the weird part. When I steer clear of them, they almost always come chasing after me. Usually by mid-afternoon of the day that I start avoiding them, and pretty much always by the second day of avoidance. I never give in to their advances because it all seems so weird to me. You know. As if it has nothing to do with anything except that they crave attention, even from someone they are not interested in. Anyhow, that is what I looked for on YouTube. I typed in something like "women chase you if you avoid them," and a whole bunch of videos came up. Among them were some videos by Stoics who taught, in my estimation, a sort of mental manipulation where women are concerned. I couldn't embrace any of that because I know that is not what Christ taught. Besides that, I am simply not that type of person. That's pretty much it.​
 
I would like to introduce a new question here:

Is soap-deprivation a real thing?

My company often puts me up in a hotel when I am traveling, and I am currently staying in a very up-to-date Holiday Inn and Suites. I noticed that there was no bar of soap in my bathroom, so I went down to the front desk and asked for one. The man behind the desk told me that they don't have any bars of soap here, and he instructed me to use the body wash instead. I honestly thought that he was joking, but he wasn't. Has anybody else ever stayed in a hotel that didn't have bars of soap? I stayed in a different Holiday Inn and Suites just a few weeks ago, and they had bars of soap there. Is this a new thing? I've never used body wash before in my life, but I guess that I am about to. The perfect ending to a perfectly crazy day.​
 
passion84god said:
I was hoping that nobody would ask. Because of my line of work, I am often in major retail stores, like Sam's Club and Costco, for several consecutive days or weeks. Sometimes I see a female worker there or another female salesperson who is similarly set up there that I am attracted to. When I casually approach them by attempting to strike up a simple conversation with them or to joke with them because I am attracted to them, they almost always shun me. You know. Lightning bolts coming out of their eye sockets. Angry looks on their faces. Everything in their body language screaming out to me, "Beat it, buster!" Since I still need to be in the same location with them for days or weeks after that, I do my best to completely avoid them so as to not possibly make them feel uncomfortable, especially in their own workspace. If I have to walk past them for some reason, then I make sure to not even make eye contact with them so as to not possibly cause any offense.

Here's the weird part. When I steer clear of them, they almost always come chasing after me. Usually by mid-afternoon of the day that I start avoiding them, and pretty much always by the second day of avoidance. I never give in to their advances because it all seems so weird to me. You know. As if it has nothing to do with anything except that they crave attention, even from someone they are not interested in. Anyhow, that is what I looked for on YouTube. I typed in something like "women chase you if you avoid them," and a whole bunch of videos came up. Among them were some videos by Stoics who taught, in my estimation, a sort of mental manipulation where women are concerned. I couldn't embrace any of that because I know that is not what Christ taught. Besides that, I am simply not that type of person. That's pretty much it.​
Click to expand...
That... Sounds eerily familiar.

Have you been on this forum before under another name?
 
Lynx said:
That... Sounds eerily familiar.

Have you been on this forum before under another name?
Click to expand...
No. What part sounds familiar? It seems to be a real thing, if one uses YouTube videos as a gauge.
 
Snackersmom said:
You say that, but your posts have classic hallmarks of a person who has been through chronic emotional abuse, neglect, or dismissal. If you are content with allowing the abuse to control you then that is your business but unfortunately you are unwittingly attempting to spread your trauma by passing it on to others, characterizing their normal human emotions as the "whining of lonely losers"
Click to expand...
Snackersmom said:
Inability or inhibition to express emotions is another hallmark of past emotional abuse, neglect or dismissal. I only used the word "fear" because you did, at the end of post #116.

When I parroted back the word "fear" to you, did that trigger you? 🤔 If so no worries, no shame in that but you need to understand that even your inability to express emotions is most likely rooted in a biochemical response from years of feedback that emotions are dangerous and should not be expressed. It probably goes back to childhood.

There are ways to teach your brain that emotions are ok (and even expressable), but it will require you to be honest with yourself, and right now I don't think you are willing to do that. But if you ever want to give it a shot I'm here for it 💙

Best!
Click to expand...
How have I spread any trauma? And how was I against any normal human emotion? I don't consider whining over "touch starvation" a legitimate emotion, that's why I posted this thread in the first place, out of skepticism.

And speaking of "emotional abuse, neglect, or dismissal", if you're being ordered around from dawn to dusk everyday, endless tasks and notifications to deal with, and how would you respond when your boss, client, colleagues, etc. is being harsh on you? Or soliciting to you? You'd be grateful to God when you're "neglected" or "dismissed" for a moment of peace with nobody bothering you. What you call "emotional expression" sounds like temper tantrum to me.
 
Snackersmom said:
Haha well I don't think I coined the term "emotionally constipated", but I'm glad it gave you a laugh!

One thing I have noticed among adult men who adhere to stoicism is that they all seem to have gone through emotional trauma of some sort as kids. They are unable to process their own emotions so they deny them for the most part, and they don't seem to think anyone else should have any either. They generally consider anger to be an acceptable emotion as long as it it expressed by an adult male. Women and children are not allowed to express anger, when they do it automatically means they are in the wrong. This allows the stoic freedom from dealing with any complicated emotions; suppression and avoidance are the keys to peace.

I am curious what you saw in women that caused you to search for answers, if you are willing to elaborate more. I do believe a stoic can also be a Christian but they generally have a lot of inner healing to do before they can be a mature one. They generally make terrible leaders, except in the bleakest of situations where defeat is likely and emotions have to be set aside for a time, such as military campaigns.
Click to expand...
Well it'd be good for a Christian to embrace some stoic virtues, when today's churches are heavily infested with the so called "therapy culture" and "wellness core", PERCEIVED emotional traumas and victimhood are amplified, the congregation, especially women, are infantilized. Whatever happens to you is beyond your control and your responsibility, how you react to it is within your control and responsibility.
 
Lovette said:
If it were a prison, it'd be a prison that locks my true self out, not in. I feel more like an observer than an inmate, watching a strange man I could hardly recognize in the mirror, managing tasks and properties handed to me in a simulated world, while my true self is exploring in another world, thinking and speaking in another language. I'm just never present in this impasse of life, even though it's relatively an easy and comfortable one.
Click to expand...
Lovette said:
Self-discipline is self-discipline, inner peace is inner peace, since you acknowledge them as fruits of the spirit, how could they be at odds with Christianity? If God can use stoicism to help you achieve it, who are you to condemn it as pagan philosophy? The problem is never the philosophies themselves, but idolatries of them, and exalting yourselves as smart and enlightened, high above the "unwashed masses". That hubris is foolishness with God, not the pursuit of self discipline, inner peace or resilience.
Click to expand...
How do these two statements harmonize? Has your true self been locked out, not in, or have you achieved inner peace? Whatever you answer, that you feel locked out of your own life is a genuine matter of concern.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Snackersmom
Lovette said:
If scoffing at the concept of bodily resurrection is the charge, then I'm afraid any denominations that preaches ascension of the soul to heaven or bodily rapture to heaven are what's really at odds with Christianity, for they have essentially denied bodily resurrection on earth with their alternatives, do you adhere to those?
Click to expand...
Does this mean that you believe in a future bodily resurrection for Christians here on the earth? If you do, then can you explain how and when that will take place? I'm not exactly sure what you mean by ascension of the soul to heaven. If you are asking if I believe a Christian's soul goes to heaven when they die, then I do because scripture seems to indicate that. 2 Corinthians 5:8; Philippians 1:23; Revelation 6:9-11. I do not believe that a Christian's soul remains there forever. I believe that a Christian's soul will be given a glorified body at Christ's second coming and that they will reign with him here on the earth. I do not believe in a bodily rapture to heaven.​
 
Lovette said:
What deters me is your labelling and closed mind. If you listen to this video, you'd learn that the problem in stoicism is not its error, but its deficiency. In other words, not about what it's gotten wrong, but what it lacks. According to this video, it even states that it has nothing against Stoicism, it just points out what you can never achieve through mental fortitude and other stoic virtues, and that's where Christianity fits in.
Click to expand...
What need is there for Christianity to fit in with Stoicism? Are things like mental fortitude and other Stoic virtues unattainable through Christ? What Stoicism lacks is everything because it cannot provide anyone with a new heart and spirit. Therefore, it cannot provide anyone with the hope of eternal life through Jesus Christ.​
 
Lovette said:
That's where you've gotten wrong. By no means do I dismiss Christ's resurrection from the dead, quite the contrary, I defend it, and I vehemently debate with others who put their hope in the ascension of the soul or the rapture of the church instead.

You see, the problem here is what resurrection inevitably entails if you trace it backward - resurrection is victory over death, death is the end of suffering, suffering is the felt in hardship, persecution, misfortune, etc., that is a hard sell, which most churches don't prepare you for, often not even inform you of. Very rarely would you hear "take up the cross and follow me," that's what I'm genuinely concerned, and, believe it or not, that's where stoicism fits in. There wouldn't be market for it had the church adequately trained its congregations for the cross. You can condemn stoicism as much as you like, I have no intention to debate you on any of it, but please know that "therapy culture" and "prosperity gospel" are more harmful and misleading than any greek philosophy.
Click to expand...
I agree with you that "therapy culture" and the "prosperity gospel" are harmful and that people are not being prepared for hardship and persecution in many churches. Where we disagree is that Stoicism somehow needs to fit in where these harmful things abound. Why isn't simply preaching the correct message, as contained in biblical Christianity, the solution to these problems?

Regarding Greek philosophies, scripture contains many warnings against them. You should know that already, but it doesn't seem to matter to you because you cling to one of them yourself.​
 
Shoot, this one of them long-playing shows. I'mma have to get more popcorn for this show.
 
Lynx said:
Shoot, this one of them long-playing shows. I'mma have to get more popcorn for this show.
Click to expand...
It does resemble a show in many ways, but we should not lose sight of the fact that a member here feels locked out of his own life. I am just trying to get him to acknowledge that there is something terribly wrong with that so it might somehow be rectified through Christ. Christians should not only be in their own bodies or lives while yet alive, but Christ should be dwelling with them there. Sadly, this does not seem to be case with Lovette. At the same time, if he chooses to remain argumentative, then the show should be cancelled, even if it has high ratings. I am admittedly growing weary of it myself because every episode seems to be exactly the same.​
 
Lovette said:
You've probably heard this frequently, a lack of touch - not verbal or textual contact via any form of communication, as in "keep in touch", but physical, skin to skin contact - with other human beings leads to oxytoxin deficiency, suboptimal mental state, sadness and other consequences. So I wonder:

  1. Is this a real thing, or just whining from lonely losers?
  2. If it is a real legitimate thing, is it a nicety or a necessity? In other words, a luxurious want or a basic need?
  3. If it is a basic need, is it limited to infants, who can't survive without caretakers' touch, as reported?
  4. If not just limited to infants, but also affecting adults, can it be substituted with pets or devices? Does holding a fuzzy kitty help?
  5. If affecting adults, and can't be substituted with pets or devices, what's your solution? Go to a massage therapist? Prayer session? Or total denial of "touch starvation"?
Click to expand...
I woke up totally exhausted today for several reasons. To the point that I didn't know if I could drive but 5 miles to work. While in the elevator heading down to the hotel lobby and parking lot, a young woman got in with her dog. A female black lab on a leash, probably about 6 months old. I extended my hand to the dog, and she playfully licked it. I then petted her head for a bit. The dog's, not the young woman's. 😄

Maybe I'm just a "lonely loser." I don't know. What I do know is that brief moment of touch invigorated me, and I thank God for it.​
 
  • Like
Reactions: seoulsearch
passion84god said:
How do these two statements harmonize? Has your true self been locked out, not in, or have you achieved inner peace? Whatever you answer, that you feel locked out of your own life is a genuine matter of concern.
Click to expand...
The two statements can harmonize if they are describing different layers of the same experience.

“Has your true self been locked out, not in?” suggests that the problem is not that your authentic self is imprisoned deep inside you, but that your everyday life has become disconnected from it. In other words, the “real you” may still exist clearly and intact, but you no longer feel able to live from it, express it, or access it consistently.

“Have you achieved inner peace?” points to a very different possibility: sometimes emotional quietness is not peace but resignation, numbness, detachment, or exhaustion. A person can appear calm while also feeling absent from their own life.

You'll understand when you realize that nothing in this world belongs to you, you're just a steward of what God has given you; and no matter how the world goes, how chaotic it seems, it's under God's control, his sovereignty is your sanity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back