>spontaneity
How about this: when you find yourself thinking of doing it, just say "I was going to put my hand on your arm then, would that bother you?"
And next time you'll know.
Sheesh
just say "I was going to put my hand on your arm then, would that bother you?"
Is that something that actual people say?
[i]"So sorry to hear about your mum, Claire. I lost mine last year and I know how hard it is. Is there anything I can do? Would it be okay if I lightly touched your forearm as a sign of basic human empathy?"[/i]
FFS.
How about this: when you find yourself thinking of doing it, just say "I was going to put my hand on your arm then, would that bother you?"
You read that they hugged me right, not the other way around?
Is that something that acutal people say?
Only in North Korea
Did they get you to confirm your willingness to said hug in a video in case you chase them in 15 years time for abuse?
What's so hard about it? Why is it so difficult to come to terms with the idea?
>They hugged me
I wasnt referring to that, but it sounds nice.
>Claire.
Nuance dude, nuance. In that situation it's probably clear where the boundary lies. In another, less so. A false dichotomy isn't necessary.
Why not just ask, or, if in doubt, don't. Some people don't like to be touched, and it is comparatively more common that women have been bothered by this sort of thing in the past.
I don't state that I'm RIGHT, but that I'm prepared to challenge my own assumptions about how others may experience my actions.
[img]I was very touched
[/img]
What's so hard about it? Why is it so difficult to come to terms with the idea?
Because as covered earlier, the actions of a few are making monsters of us all.
Touch is a basic form of human communication. I am not going to avoid shaking hands, a comforting touch, or even just going to lunch with a female workmate, simply because some other bellend is completely inappropriate or a bit rapey.
I'd far rather, as emsz suggested, treat female workmates the same as I would male workmates.
I did give up on this thread as it wandered off but it came back again.
for me the key thing is emotional intelligence and empathy. I clearly failed in that regard in the situation I outlined in the OP but I learned. Unfortunately too many people especially men find the emotional intelligence and empathy beyond them
Touch and hugs are an integral part of my job. I use both frequently. The key for me is to read the intentions, needs and wishes of the other person. When you get that right you are in a good position.
For example - I have to console a lot of bereaved people often even telling them their loved one has died . A hug is often appropriate. the key is not to rush in. I will use my body language to offer a hug ( sometimes I even say " do you want / need a hug") - open arms a little, move slightly forward. Nice open stance then leave it to them to make the next move. The key in this situation is to make it obvious the offer is there but not to push it on them. I have been surprised at who takes me up on it sometimes. I had a 40 yr old man I knew fairly well spend 5 mins crying in my arms, I had an 70 yr old woman I didn't know at all but who I could see was very distressed basically cling to me for comfort.
If a hug is not appropriate or wanted I hand on the shoulder is a comforting but non threatening touch. I hold peoples hands, I hug them, I do whatever is appropriate and wanted.
colleages - I learned - no touch without consent. consent can be explicit of implicit. Read their body language and make your own body language non threatening. I would never initiate a hug or a touch with a colleague. I would always be open to them initiating
Its all about emotional intelligence and empathy
Sbob - you been stalking me 😉
Wise words TJ
But there is a [i]big[/i] difference between lacking a bit of emotional intelligence and being a sex pest.
Someone shouldn't be punished for the former just because the latter exists.
But there is a big difference between lacking a bit of emotional intelligence and being a sex pest.Someone shouldn't be punished for the former just because the latter exists.
Excellent point.
tjagain - MemberSbob - you been stalking me?
Not with your reputation.
All those in favour of changing TJ's handle to "Uncle Touchy", say aye.
😛
But there is a big difference between lacking a bit of emotional intelligence and being a sex pest.Someone shouldn't be punished for the former just because the latter exists.
I am not convinced there is. I think its a spectrum with incidents like I described in the OP at one end to Weinstein at the other wirth the handsy MPs in the middle. Look at the defense those MPs try to use " banter" "being flirtatious" etc. these guys are emotional cripples who have no understanding that what they did ws wrong
Fair enough, you're a sex pest. 😉
