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

The Need for Touch

aeon.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 97 posts

Re: The Need for Touch

#51

Post by randomperson321 »

shybutnotshy wrote: post #3
nxc18 wrote: post #2

I don't know how common this is, but I was raised to see intimate touch as reserved exclusively for family and sexual/romantic partners. There's a pretty big mental block when it comes to touch, and I think that's made my life materially worse. Do others experience that? I grew up in New England for context. I'm somewhat fortunate that if I get particularly lonely or touch deprived, I can hop on grindr/scruff/hornet…

You have to be ok with casual sex. I'm mostly not. First I don't want to catch something (aids, chlamydia, herpes, ...) so a few minutes of sex doesn't seem worth the risk. I know, at least according to popular media that puts me in the minority. If my attitude is common it's probably not easy to spot. Second, I don't want to hurt people. I know they exist but 9 times out of 10 people I meet want a serious relationsh…

Why do you say your attitude is "bad"? Thinking about what you want long-term is far superior to being blown about by the winds of circumstance. I would guess that your issue is your tactics, not your strategy. If you think you're picky, you need to be going on more dates and meeting more people, not fewer. You aren't going to hurt these people if you communicate honestly and openly with them when you meet them.

It's like job interviewing. If you only do it (and more importantly only think about it) once a year, and only when you know it's a job you _really_ want to get, you're going to be really nervous and perform poorly.

Re: The Need for Touch

#52

Post by Dumblydorr »

I don't agree that touch is the most important sense. For me, vision and hearing both come out far ahead.

Where would I be without Chopin's music, without the sound of my friends' instruments as we jam, without the loving voices of friends and family?

Where would I be without vision, I couldn't see the works of Monet, Van Gogh, Miyazaki, Blizzard, Bethesda, or practically all code and screens and UI?

Touch feels nice, but as an American man, I was taught to touch only when necessary, lest the other person find it over the line. The OP author is an Italian female, so there's a cultural abd gender difference no doubt. But personally, I don't miss shaking hands or hugging, nevermind cheek kissing.

Re: The Need for Touch

#53

Post by coldtea »

randomperson321 wrote: post #49
coldtea wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> First I don't want to catch something (aids, chlamydia, herpes, ...) so a few minutes of sex doesn't seem worth the risk. Sounds more like microphobia. The chances are not that great. Except if you get casual sex from the fringe of society...

Is there hard data about this somewhere?

Perhaps for some countries, but most people go with their empirical data and knowledge of the world.

Re: The Need for Touch

#54

Post by randomperson321 »

scottlocklin wrote: post #36
nxc18 wrote: post #2

I don't know how common this is, but I was raised to see intimate touch as reserved exclusively for family and sexual/romantic partners. There's a pretty big mental block when it comes to touch, and I think that's made my life materially worse. Do others experience that? I grew up in New England for context. I'm somewhat fortunate that if I get particularly lonely or touch deprived, I can hop on grindr/scruff/hornet…

New Englandah here. More or less the same upbringing you describe, where intimate touch is reserved for sexual partners and family members. I don't agree, though, that it's made my life materially worse in any way, and articles like OP actively give me the heeby jeebies. I find touchy-feely people and the West Coast hugs newage (rhymes with sewage) quasi-surf-brah culture to be generally fake and creepy. Yeah, you ha…

Should those really be considered "no touch" cultures? I would assume most couples, even within those cultures, touch each other frequently.

Re: The Need for Touch

#55

Post by coldtea »

virmundi wrote: post #50
coldtea wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> First I don't want to catch something (aids, chlamydia, herpes, ...) so a few minutes of sex doesn't seem worth the risk. Sounds more like microphobia. The chances are not that great. Except if you get casual sex from the fringe of society...

Statistically 1/4 heterosexuals have some form of an STI. They can be even higher depending on what you read. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3575167/ STI in transsexuals is even higher. Some reports have it at 3/4 with high percentage of HIV. High rates among gays. Lesbians are pretty low (but have high domestic abuse rates). STIs are a real danger unless many precautions are taken. We’re looking at den…

>Statistically 1/4 heterosexuals have some form of an STI.

Which is misleading, as it includes STIs so benign that a full 1/4 of the population can have without any associated issues...

Re: The Need for Touch

#56

Post by brightball »

shybutnotshy wrote: post #3
nxc18 wrote: post #2

I don't know how common this is, but I was raised to see intimate touch as reserved exclusively for family and sexual/romantic partners. There's a pretty big mental block when it comes to touch, and I think that's made my life materially worse. Do others experience that? I grew up in New England for context. I'm somewhat fortunate that if I get particularly lonely or touch deprived, I can hop on grindr/scruff/hornet…

You have to be ok with casual sex. I'm mostly not. First I don't want to catch something (aids, chlamydia, herpes, ...) so a few minutes of sex doesn't seem worth the risk. I know, at least according to popular media that puts me in the minority. If my attitude is common it's probably not easy to spot. Second, I don't want to hurt people. I know they exist but 9 times out of 10 people I meet want a serious relationsh…

There's absolutely nothing wrong with your point of view. I had basically the same point of view when I was dating and never strayed from it.

The only thing that did change was that I made myself start dating and I was extremely honest. I told anyone that I asked out (or the rare "asked me out") that I wasn't looking for a serious relationship. The first time I said it was after a bad breakup because I didn't think I was ready for it, but I was shocked at how well this was received.

What I accidentally discovered is that women often want to go out, they want to go on a date, get to know you and see if there's a mutual connection there. What they don't want is to be stuck if they decide it's not and you become overly clingy, so they have to concoct ways to let you down easy or break it off without hurting your feelings.

It's been 18 years so forgive me if I can't remember exactly how I phrased it, but I think at some point in a conversation I'd say something along the lines of "Hey, I'm not looking for a serious relationship right now but I like you. Would you like to [have dinner|catch a movie|hang out] sometime?"

It was great. No pressure on anyone (including sexual pressure), no serious hard feelings from any of it. Actually made a lot of life long friends. Over the course of 1 year I went out with about 12 different people and met my wife. We've been married for 16 years now.

Re: The Need for Touch

#57

Post by FrankyHollywood »

scottlocklin wrote: post #36
nxc18 wrote: post #2

I don't know how common this is, but I was raised to see intimate touch as reserved exclusively for family and sexual/romantic partners. There's a pretty big mental block when it comes to touch, and I think that's made my life materially worse. Do others experience that? I grew up in New England for context. I'm somewhat fortunate that if I get particularly lonely or touch deprived, I can hop on grindr/scruff/hornet…

New Englandah here. More or less the same upbringing you describe, where intimate touch is reserved for sexual partners and family members. I don't agree, though, that it's made my life materially worse in any way, and articles like OP actively give me the heeby jeebies. I find touchy-feely people and the West Coast hugs newage (rhymes with sewage) quasi-surf-brah culture to be generally fake and creepy. Yeah, you ha…

haha, you gave me a good laugh there, nicely spoken! :)

But you are right. People who are lonely or depressed are better off having some good friends they can call to hang out on a Friday night. Having some huggy colleague or kisses from you aunt don't make you feel better.

My experience is that an intimate relation with someone is nice at first, but as more people have said in this thread, it fades away after some years. I personally never feel better than having a great night with friends.

Re: The Need for Touch

#58

Post by liveoneggs »

reify_null wrote: post #28
saiya-jin wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are many, not 100% for this reason, but often are - unhealthy competitiveness, inability to be happy with what one currently has (clue - it won't get much better once more is achieved). Children from broken families often don't believe in long term relationships or starting family and come up with reasoning like overpopulation and actually doing good for mankind. General insecurities. Afraid of generally any co…

Is this also different between growing up without a father vs growing up without a mother? I have some thoughts on this of my own, not sure how accurate they are. I suspect the first case causes more competitiveness issues, general aggressiveness (or toxic masculinity if you will, though the term is somewhat problematic) The latter more issues with trusting women, intimacy, etc. Not believing in long term relationshi…

there are much fewer examples of growing up without a female influence

Re: The Need for Touch

#59

Post by spaetzleesser »

germinalphrase wrote: post #4
nxc18 wrote: post #2

I don't know how common this is, but I was raised to see intimate touch as reserved exclusively for family and sexual/romantic partners. There's a pretty big mental block when it comes to touch, and I think that's made my life materially worse. Do others experience that? I grew up in New England for context. I'm somewhat fortunate that if I get particularly lonely or touch deprived, I can hop on grindr/scruff/hornet…

I’ma Brazilian Jiu jitsu player. The sport has a great deal of depth to technique and the physical exertion can be quite intense/rewarding; however, I do believe that the physical touch (and implicit trust therein) are an important aspect as well. It’s aggressive, but neither violent or sexual. Most of my training partners could severely injure me at any time, but I expose myself physically and trust them not to.

That’s a good point. Even in boxing you do a lot of touching and also the concept of “private space” isn’t valid there either.

Re: The Need for Touch

#60

Post by bluntfang »

Dumblydorr wrote: post #52

I don't agree that touch is the most important sense. For me, vision and hearing both come out far ahead. Where would I be without Chopin's music, without the sound of my friends' instruments as we jam, without the loving voices of friends and family? Where would I be without vision, I couldn't see the works of Monet, Van Gogh, Miyazaki, Blizzard, Bethesda, or practically all code and screens and UI? Touch feels nice…

>Touch feels nice, but as an American man, I was taught to touch only when necessary, lest the other person find it over the line.

What? You must not watch sports then. High fives. Butt slaps. Chest bumps. etc. In fact, we might even say that there's a big problem with men inappropriately touching people, just look at the next potential Leader of the Free World, they both have a reputation for inappropriate touching. If you can be President of the United States while also "Grab 'em [women] by the pussy", I think we're being taught as men that we can easily get away with inappropriate touching.

Post reply on HN