? ?

please ignore the generalizations and look for the point

« previous entry | next entry »
Nov. 3rd, 2001 | 11:18 am

cierrablue just got me thinking about personal space, and how much greater our expectation of it is in the United States compared to a lot of the world. we do very little casual touching here. it general is either formal or meaningful, nothing inbetween. even when we are forced into close quarters, we try to avoid as much contact as possible. (how much time have you spent staring at elevator numbers?). prolonged eye contact is unusual in our culture, almost as if we are afraid that, if we don't glance away every few seconds, we might reveal some secret inner self. and we might at that. wouldn't it be interesting if everyone in the country touched everyone they met and looked unflinchingly into the eyes of everyone they spoke to, just for one day?

Link | Leave a comment | | Flag

Comments {11}

Pale Orchid

how much time have you spent staring at elevator numbers?

from: starlazdaze
date: Nov. 3rd, 2001 10:41 am (UTC)
Link

wow, yeah...way too much.

When I was little my grandmother told me never to look a stranger in the eye, because if they were a "bad person" they might target me...

I'm thinking that kind of stuck with me...

I should make an effort.

Reply | Thread

The Book Foole

(no subject)

from: bookfoole
date: Nov. 3rd, 2001 10:43 am (UTC)
Link

"we do very little casual touching here. it general is either formal or meaningful, nothing inbetween"

On the other hand, in a society of casual touching, touching isn't as meaningful, so you'd lose the meaningfulness. You would end up touching people you don't necessarily like or want to associate with just because they might be people you come in contact through the area you live or the place you work, so touching would no long mean anything exceptional. You might gain something, but you'd also lose something.

Reply | Thread

Cierra

(no subject)

from: cierrablue
date: Nov. 3rd, 2001 10:53 am (UTC)
Link

i got you thinking... you got me thinking. I removed a sentence from my post (the homophobic sentance) because i realized that was an assumption that, after reading your post, was probably flat out wrong.

i think that touching everyone we addressed and looking unflinchingly into a persons eyes while we spoke to them would make the connection deeper. in my experience when i have done that, the conversation tended to be more meaningful and more "real".

what an interesting post.

Reply | Thread

i

Re:

from: i
date: Nov. 3rd, 2001 11:17 am (UTC)
Link

you started it :)

Reply | Parent | Thread

not always right, but often not wrong

(no subject)

from: ravengirl
date: Nov. 3rd, 2001 11:39 am (UTC)
Link

on the el
we each seek a seat of our own
and only deign to share when the train is crowded~

on the street
cell phones are glued to our ears
as we walk past people we will never befriend~

i do greetings and sometimes small talk
but what else is there to do between the 4th floor
and the 10th~

Reply | Thread

disasterpants jones

(no subject)

from: muse
date: Nov. 3rd, 2001 11:41 am (UTC)
Link

What you mentioned in your post, good Dave, is something we discussed in an old Sociology class I took some time ago. The text for the class mentioned that census takers in the United States were starting to be chosen to work with certain ethnic communities, like the Latino population, who, by culture, invade the three foot personal space zone that is common with most Americans. The census takers discussed how the Latino individuals on a whole usually sat very closely to them and touched them unexpectedly. Those census takers who were not used to that sort of thing found themselves put off, and the families being interviewed, in turn, felt put off by the unease of the census takers. So they resolved that issue by having Latino census takers to work with the community on their own level.

In many European countries with a Latin-based (or Romance language), the habit of showing physical affection by way of greeting is common. It's not uncommon to see two male friends with their arms around each other or kissing each other on the cheeks. Female friends often hold hands, which in the United States, most people take to mean an indication of sexual preference. I've always disliked that sort of mentality. My friends are precious to me because I don't call people that title casually. I touch them, pester them, and crawl all over them through the course of our meetings.

What you said is intriguing, Dave, but parts of it scare me. Not everyone that I look at is someone I want to look in the eye. My eyes reveal my soul and emotions--everyone who's seen me in person speaks of how expressive my eyes are--and I do not feel comfortable sharing those things with a stranger who may or may not be ill-intentioned. I tend to smile at everyone I pass on the street, but the idea of touching a stranger is not something I am comfortable with doing. I've had too many strangers develop strange attachments to me through actions less than touching.

I touch those that I know and adore because my touch is not something I take for granted.

Thank you for the thought provoking post; as always, you make me regard the world more seriously and also, to study my place in that greater world.

In sunshine and content,
Jewel

Reply | Thread

Lonita

(no subject)

from: lonita
date: Nov. 3rd, 2001 12:08 pm (UTC)
Link

You're right. We're so used to touching meaning intimacy, and we've become paranoid of molestation, of violations of our bodies and our selves. We've become paranoid of how others view us, as well; which means we can't even touch our friends in public, for fear that Someone Might Think Something.

It's ridiculous. There's times I'd dearly love to hug my friends, or even just touch them - sometimes I do, most of the time I don't.

Perhaps we'd be better off psychologically in the nature of getting along with others, and knowing ourselves better, and being more comfortable around people, if we could simply touch them without the worry that Someone Might Think Something. We're far too uncomfy with outselves, far too uptight, and far too un-able, when it comes to getting into any sort of relationship with another person.

Reply | Thread

(no subject)

from: lique
date: Nov. 3rd, 2001 12:16 pm (UTC)
Link

Heading out to Portland, trying to fall asleep in an aisle seat (which I just don't do well), I kept looking over at the woman attempting to sleep next to me and thinking, "you know, it's a shame about this culture ... were it socially acceptable to cuddle up with strangers, this would be so much more comfortable and pleasant for the both of us."

Reply | Thread

i

Re:

from: i
date: Nov. 3rd, 2001 12:20 pm (UTC)
Link

smile

Reply | Parent | Thread

Not Your Girly

(no subject)

from: notyourgirly
date: Nov. 3rd, 2001 02:23 pm (UTC)
Link

New Zealand's culture is similarly lacking in casual touch, but while I've been at university I've associated with a lot of younger people and noticed that many of them have a much more intimate attitude towards their friends than "in my day". Male and female friends hug each other as a greeting or farewell, and just seem less standoffish in general. It's made me more aware of the way that a lot of young'uns I see around town behave with their friends, and they're quite similar. I don't know, maybe I grew up in a particularly touch-free zone or perhaps our society is actually changing - but I like it.

As people become more relaxed about touching their friends, maybe they'll start being friendlier towards strangers. I hope so :)

Reply | Thread

Red Thread:         Snarky Librarian

(no subject)

from: redthread
date: Nov. 3rd, 2001 05:15 pm (UTC)
Link

Hmm, if everyone did that, it probably would make us feel more connected. If one person tried that as an experiment, he/she would probably be punched out before the day was up ;)

Reply | Thread