Life,  Reading

“Don’t Touch Me, Hug Me”: How to Respect People’s Personal Space

Loneliness” can easily lead readers’ expectations in this direction: People in modern society are in a state of muscle weakness, sexual boredom, and love impotence because they are addicted to electronic devices. They lost their way in reality, and thus lost the courage to act collectively and the ability to change reality.
  These issues are covered in this book, but the author does not always view and analyze them from a negative perspective. People’s narcissism, the defense of their own body rights and the insistence on the distance between themselves and others may have gone too far. With the blessing of electronic equipment and cyberspace, it may have become sick, but the author did not indulge in rendering and complaining about these problems.
  On the contrary, by combing through history, the author clarifies that people’s right to defend their bodies has its own origin and rich legitimacy. It is impossible for people to return to the so-called happy and harmonious state by rejecting the rights of the body, just like the indifference between people in the high-speed rail car may be regrettable, but not many people are willing to return to the so-called steaming The era of green trains. There are many reasons for the current alienation between people, not all of which are the result of people’s self-selection. The current controversy surrounding the “right to touch the body” may open up a new path to solve the problem.
  Therefore, it is a major feature of this book to review history based on the present and propose feasible solutions for the future. The author is neither blindly sentimental, indulging in the beautified past, trying to return to the pre-modern era where chickens and dogs know each other to solve the current sense of alienation, nor is he too worried about the future of human digital survival, nor is he unable to go back. In the process of clarifying the historical trajectory of body rights, the drivers of reality, and the future direction, we try to explore how to correct the current disturbances, and then return to the middle way, delimiting people’s The way to get along with the body and mind in the new era.
  The noise of the crowd in the Internet age can easily produce amplification and distortion effects. Feelings of physical fragility, unreality, and people’s preference for intimacy in cyberspace rather than offline seem to be the norm, but this perception is partial truth at best. On the one hand, a sense of alienation is a luxury for those who have leisure and the right to speak. Just imagine those courier buddies who walk through the streets and alleys every day among the bustling crowds, how can they feel such emotion.
  From a historical perspective, at the moment when people feel sorry for being alienated from each other and cannot enjoy normal skin-to-skin contact, people seem to easily forget that not long ago, the fragility of the body and the cramped living space were the normal life of most people, and in the world In most places, this is still a luxury.
  The right to inviolability of the body, sufficient personal autonomy, and a satisfactory distance between each other are not achieved overnight. What is reflected behind it is a history of continuous struggle and tortuous progress of all kinds of people. Fear of physical harm has its historical roots. Once upon a time, methods of discipline and punishment, including torture and flogging, were considered justified. fight for their rights. Not so long ago, disadvantaged or marginalized groups such as women, children and gay people did not enjoy full control over their own bodies. Perhaps the overcorrection must be overcorrected, perhaps people’s excessive defense of their own body rights, excessive rejection of intimacy with others, and the resulting so-called self-determined loneliness are all staged prices that have to be paid. And considering the waves of the #MeToo movement, a new round of body rights and social distancing can be expected.
  In addition to the “cherishing” of hard-won rights, the author also explores the capital and technical drivers behind the creation of “body rights”. In the author’s view, materializing the body into a commodity and constantly inducing consumers to invest more in making it more perfect obviously aggravates people’s guard against it. The vulnerability of people’s bodies. Among them are the “black hands” of overtreatment. It seems that the more advanced the medical technology is, the more vulnerable the body is. For example, previously unknown viruses seem to emerge in endlessly.
  As for the blessing of technology, people are already familiar with it without waiting for the author to say more – the alienation caused by instant electronic devices and being online at any time is already a must-have for sociologists. The question is, are people that innocent? The explanation other than technology seems to be reasonable: outside of high-paced work and life, emotional investment is time-consuming and energy-consuming, which is a very “expensive” thing. The high cost of living seems to be unable to tolerate uncalculated pure love. Love is very expensive, life is very tiring, so please stay away. Therefore, rather than claiming to be coerced and calculated by technology with an “innocent” face, it is better to say that it is the complicity of people and technology. People really need substitutes, and they need the intimacy of non-real investment in the virtual space.
  Maybe one day people will finally realize that people cannot completely avoid physical and emotional fragility, and it is impossible to completely seek advantages and avoid disadvantages. True love will hurt, without face-to-face real skin-to-skin contact and real emotional dedication and interaction in the offline world, we cannot become a complete human being.
  In this sense, one of the harms done by the salty troopers is that in an era when people need to overcome various psychological and physical barriers to build closer relationships, their words and deeds have exacerbated the sense of distrust and alienation among people, and Denial of physical touch in the real world. Contrary to what some commentators believe, it is not people’s fear of each other that poisons the social climate, but the frivolity and free lunch mentality and manipulative desire of sexual harassers that make people disgusted, and thus poison the social atmosphere. The mentality of objectifying the opposite sex is not sentimental but a manifestation of incapacity for love. What people need is a hug that is deeply invested in emotional giving, not a thirst-quenching superficial touch full of bullying. Whether it is full of love or not, both the giver and the receiver know it well. According to the words of the author of this book, “the skin does not lie”. Don’t touch me, hug me.
  Perhaps the dilemma between vulnerability and injury prevention and loneliness seeking true love will be the normal state of human beings for a long period of time, and the author has not prescribed a clear and clear prescription for this. Of course, there is no one-size-fits-all statute. People in different regions live in different stages of development and time and space, and their demands for bodily rights and intimacy vary widely. In many places, the right to survival and the right to development are still the most urgent human rights. However, in those advanced societies that have fully asserted their rights to the body, they are now facing the challenge of re-intimacy of the body with the advent of aging. Fragile body, how to carry out correct and moderate care issues.
  Another issue not addressed by the authors but of increasing importance is the lethality of virtual spaces. Originally, people wanted to safely gain the attention of others through non-contact “likes”, and in the process obtain comfort to the lonely soul. However, cyberbullying is no less damaging to the spirit than to the body. When we gain the sense of security brought by physical distance through the screen, the destruction of the heart and mind seems to be as hard to guard against as “Sadako” coming through the screen. Which one is more fragile, body or mind, seems to be facing new uncertainties.

  In short, how to give and give and reap love and kindness in the process of body affirmation and open heart to embrace and interact is a new and lasting topic. Don’t touch me, don’t touch me against my will; hug me, let’s embrace and warm each other with love and kindness.

error: Content is protected !!