Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hug vs. Handshake

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 167 posts

Re: Hug vs. Handshake

#91

Post by mikestew »

JonnieCache wrote: post #34

I'm more concerned about the strength of handshakes. I have a bias against anyone who actively squeezes my hand with anything beyond a simple, firm grasp. It comes across as macho, like you've got something to prove, and therefore untrustworthy. I'd like to point out here that I'm admitting a bias rather than expressing an opinion. EDIT: at least now I'm approaching something resembling adulthood I don't have the pro…

at least now I'm approaching something resembling adulthood I don't have the problem of trying to negotiate on the fly which of the various intricate hiphop style handshakes we're executing.

Don't be so sure. I'm in my 40s and run into this from time to time with informal settings, with full-grown adult males.

Re: Hug vs. Handshake

#92

Post by jrmoreau »

melvinmt wrote: post #43
JonnieCache wrote: post #34

I'm more concerned about the strength of handshakes. I have a bias against anyone who actively squeezes my hand with anything beyond a simple, firm grasp. It comes across as macho, like you've got something to prove, and therefore untrustworthy. I'd like to point out here that I'm admitting a bias rather than expressing an opinion. EDIT: at least now I'm approaching something resembling adulthood I don't have the pro…

Weird, I have the complete opposite: I have a slight feeling of distrust when somebody gives me a weak hand.

Same here, mushy handshakes make me feel uneasy.

I never, ever initiate hugs at work either. If someone else wants to, I'll go in, but I just don't.

Re: Hug vs. Handshake

#93

Post by imsofuture »

Tangaroa wrote: post #86

Hugs are sexual harassment. Any unrequested contact with the opposite sex is cause for immediate termination (or expulsion if you're still in school) and may lead to criminal charges. Different cultures are different, but this is the standard drill repeated from elementary school onward through workplace policies in my part of the US. People routinely ignore it without punishment, but it's there hanging over the head…

Hugs are sexual harassment.

That's just not true. A hug could be sexual harassment, but so could a really dirty handshake. Let's not live in a world where we're scared of normal interaction.

Re: Hug vs. Handshake

#94

Post by ffn »

Maybe it's me and my clearly misogynistic contributing-to-the-patriarchy-and-oppressing-my-female attitude toward the whole thing, but with females I always try my hardest to be friendly with hugs over handshakes. Most of them are totally okay with this (even my former professors), but if not, it was my privilege to embarrass myself and come off as a creeper to you.

Re: Hug vs. Handshake

#95

Post by jessedhillon »

danielrm26 wrote: post #79

Would you hug Hilary Clinton if you’ve met her on two or three different occasions? Of course not. And it’s the same for the female CEO of a major bank. So then, why would you hug a female work associate that you’ve only met twice? Answer: you don’t hug Mrs. Clinton or the female CEO because you respect them too much. Now, notice that this is how men treat ALL males. http://danielmiessler.com/blog/on-hugs-vs-handshak…

What? I would absolutely go in for the hug on Hillary, especially if we've met and had meaningful exchanges. I think it's weird that you think hug -> low respect.

Re: Hug vs. Handshake

#96

Post by mst »

jedberg wrote: post #75
CognitiveLens wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always wondered what happens when two people meet who literally don't flex any muscle in their hand while shaking... must be some kind of strange hand mashing. I grip with what I hope is a sincere level of firmness - as in, "I'm really pleased to be shaking your hand, thank you" - and I'm flummoxed when it feels as though the other person has simply dangled their appendage for me to interact with.

> and I'm flummoxed when it feels as though the other person has simply dangled their appendage for me to interact with. This was a wonderful turn of phrase. It should be in some sales manual or something.

That or a list of unintentional double entendres.

Re: Hug vs. Handshake

#97

Post by itsybitsycoder »

davidkatz wrote: post #10

This has been bothering me for a while, and I generally come down on the side of hugging. Hand shaking with a woman always seems to me like I'm forcing a male to male ritual on the situation. No matter how formal the meeting is, it always seems off. Now, granted, I'm not going to hug the female CEO of a company I'm doing business with at the first meeting, but even so, a handshake still feels off. My general rule of…

What about a handshake makes you feel it is a male ritual?

Re: Hug vs. Handshake

#98

Post by smacktoward »

jessedhillon wrote: post #95
danielrm26 wrote: post #79

Would you hug Hilary Clinton if you’ve met her on two or three different occasions? Of course not. And it’s the same for the female CEO of a major bank. So then, why would you hug a female work associate that you’ve only met twice? Answer: you don’t hug Mrs. Clinton or the female CEO because you respect them too much. Now, notice that this is how men treat ALL males. http://danielmiessler.com/blog/on-hugs-vs-handshak…

What? I would absolutely go in for the hug on Hillary, especially if we've met and had meaningful exchanges. I think it's weird that you think hug -> low respect.

I actually have hugged Hillary Clinton (seriously!), even though I'm quite certain she had no idea who I was.

It's awesome, everyone should do it.

Re: Hug vs. Handshake

#99

Post by pdenya »

troels wrote: post #68
unalone wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people are just huggers. As a fan of hugs I approve of people who get down to hugging quickly, though I understand why non-huggers would be squicked out by that. If that wigs you out, I have a particular friend group for whom kissing becomes a thing almost immediately after they've met you. The first time it happens it can be absurdly disorienting.

I love how you're framing people as "huggers" or "non-huggers". Similar to the good old "technical" and "non-technical".

Bad comparison because hugger vs non-hugger is a preference, not a range of understanding.

Re: Hug vs. Handshake

#100

Post by ricardobeat »

danielrm26 wrote: post #79

Would you hug Hilary Clinton if you’ve met her on two or three different occasions? Of course not. And it’s the same for the female CEO of a major bank. So then, why would you hug a female work associate that you’ve only met twice? Answer: you don’t hug Mrs. Clinton or the female CEO because you respect them too much. Now, notice that this is how men treat ALL males. http://danielmiessler.com/blog/on-hugs-vs-handshak…

Your feelings probably come from the idea that "Men don’t do this with other men". They do, just not in your social group or culture. It's not disrespectful; if you don't really know each other it's awkward at worst.

Simple test: would you go get coffee with this person, with no business interests? Yes) Hug for men, hug+cheek-kiss for women, No) Hand-shake.

Disclaimer: I'm from Brazil.

Post reply on HN