I am 23 years old. My boyfriend and I have been together for 4 years, we have gone through many life situations, separated, but still returned to each other.
I love him very much and appreciate him as a person and as a man. I am happy with everything in our relationship except that he does not give me enough warmth and affection. I grew up in a family where expressions of love were always reinforced with hugs, kisses, and touches. But in his family, on the contrary, everyone is kind of cold in this regard. They have wonderful, kind and respectful relationships, the family is complete, but in terms of showing tenderness through tactile sensations, there is no such thing. This worries me for 2 reasons: 1. I want initiative on his part, but he very rarely shows it, 2. when I approach him with “my tenderness,” he sometimes gets irritated and isolates himself from me even more, it seems to him that I can be intrusive and get into his personal space. He practically doesn’t kiss me on the lips, he says that he doesn’t like it. And this is not disgust, in an intimate sense everything is fine with this (just without kissing on the lips). It’s hard for me to live with this, I feel emotionally cold from it. I tried to talk to him about this, he replies that he simply doesn’t have as much warmth as I give him and is trying to demand in return.
This seems to be a trifle, since in a relationship there is love, respect, trust and everything that is really important, but from this “little thing” grievances accumulate and sometimes result in the form of unpleasant words and swearing.
Help me please! What should we do?
I understand that he is already a mature personality (30 years old), he cannot be changed and we must accept him as he is. And I understand that men express their feelings not like women, but differently. But on the other hand, I also have needs and living constantly in a state of dissatisfaction is wrong.
I don’t know what to do, I really hope for your professional advice.
Hello Julia!
It is very difficult to recommend something when one partner is trying to solve the problem and the other is not participating. It's a pity that your husband doesn't understand how important affection is to you. Often, problems with infidelity begin with the simplest thing: the husband does not caress or show much tenderness to his wife. A kiss on the lips is the highest intimate trust. Your husband says that he doesn’t have that much warmth for you... hmm... but does he love you? Or maybe he has someone and doesn’t need this affection? Sincerely, Olesya.
Good answer 4 Bad answer 0Hello Julia.
A person always has a choice, and you also have a choice in this situation. Will I continue to live with this person and build a relationship with him or I don’t want such a relationship anymore and I want to end it. If you choose the first option, then you must understand that we cannot change others, we can only change ourselves. Are you ready to part with a man whom you love and value as a man, but who cannot give you enough affection due to his upbringing? How valuable are one and the other to you? Are these values balanced for you or is one of them more significant for you? What can you do to make you feel more satisfied in your relationship? What compromises are you willing to make to make the relationship comfortable for both of you? Are you frank and open in conversations with your man? Do you tell him that “tenderness” on his part is very important to you? Have you ever looked for compromises to resolve your mutual misunderstanding on this issue?
If you want to understand yourself and your question in more detail, please contact me, I will be glad to help.
Good answer 6 Bad answer 2Hello Julia! There is such a concept - like love languages - for you one of such languages is tactile touches, for another - words, for a third - gifts. It turns out that you and your husband speak different languages Love. Often problems in the family begin due to a lack of understanding of this. Your husband loves you, but he can show Love in his own way, accessible to him, and this is not about gender differences, some men can also speak the language of tactile touches. This situation is not easy for you - since here you have an option - or take it for granted and understand your husband by talking to him and perhaps he will feel your need and try to hug and kiss you at least a little more often. For your husband, such aversion to affection may be associated with his upbringing, which was so unacceptable in his family, or with experience that did not lead to anything good, that is, the roots of this lie in his psyche and experiences gained in life, responsibility for relationships in the couple bears both - and the main thing in a relationship is compromises, perhaps you will be able to come to it. Good luck to you!
Good answer 5 Bad answer 1 
Hello Julia! Indeed, each person shows love in his own way. At the same time, the partner may be offended that the other has his own way. But is it worth being offended by this? After all, everything else is fine with you. Kisses and touches are important for you, but not for him. What to do? If he doesn't like touching, what does he like? It makes sense to find out what exactly pleases him. Your husband considers a kiss a violation of his personal space. This mechanism was laid down from childhood and if it doesn’t bother him personally, then he won’t do anything about it. I think you should be very careful and slowly slowly accustom him to tactile sensations. After all, imagine, a person has grown up all his life without this, moreover, it is unpleasant for him and you “climb” towards him with hugs. The reaction is obvious. Start by touching your finger, for example, his palm (though I don’t know, maybe that’s what feels good to him) or touching his face, etc. And ask his reaction, but without impositions or pestering. Let's say one touch can be practiced for one week or more. Gradually you can reach kissing. Good luck to you!
Good answer 4 Bad answer 1 
Julia, hello.
Julia, people are very different. But schematically, of course, you can divide the types of people, and they are different. The simplest thing: introverts, extroverts. According to socionics, there are even more of them. And there is a division of people according to their perception of the world. Visual learners, auditory learners, kinesthetic learners. You, Julia, are kinesthetic. It is important for you to feel a person. Smells are important to you. This is how you “hear” a person. Your husband does not understand you because he most likely speaks a different language. Julia, maybe try to understand this language and start “speaking” it? Watch your husband. How does he express his feelings? Also, talk to your husband about your way of communication, explain to him how important hugs and touches are to you. If you have good trusting relationship, you will understand each other. Buy books on psychology. Read it yourself, let him read it. Maybe it’s worth reading together, starting to study ourselves together. I think your relationship will improve significantly.
All the best.
Sincerely, T.Sh.
Good answer 4 Bad answer 0Touch is genetically the first, initial channel of communication for us. Even before a child acquires the ability for visual, auditory, speech, and gestural communication, adults interact with him only through tactile contact. Parents and the child at the very beginning of his life build their relationship through touch. 3. Freud, in his theory of psychosexual development, believed that it was in this first stage of life, which he called the oral phase, when tactile sensations predominate in the child, that the foundations of a person’s mental constitution are laid, and the preconditions for his mental health and illness are formed.
According to some researchers, for example Harlow (1971), touch, or bodily contact, is a biological need, the satisfaction or dissatisfaction of which influences the formation of attachment and love in a person. Montague (1972) believes that touch is the most direct means of emotional interaction, and therefore he views cutaneous stimulation as a fundamental and essential element in the healthy development of every organism.
But something else needs to be noted. In society, touch as a means of communication is strictly regulated and is subject to social norms and taboos that vary from culture to culture. Regulation is most concerned with touching the face, head, and intimate parts of the body (Izard K., 1980).
Touch used in social interactions is divided into several types. There are touches due to professional activities. So, for example, doctors, hairdressers, cutters, sports trainers touch other people while performing their professional duties, that is, purely functionally.
Another type of touching is socially determined and ritual in nature. This could be handshakes, common in European culture, mutual rubbing
noses, reminiscent of sniffing, as in some island cultures, kisses on the shoulders (as in India), forehead, cheeks (as in Europe and Russia), etc.
And finally, the third type of touch is more intimate, personally colored, indicating close relationships between people - kinship, friendship, love, acquaintance, sexual connection.
In general, men and women touch each other with the same frequency, but there are also specific differences due to certain factors, in particular age. Judith Hall and Helen Vecchia report, for example, that in opposite-sex couples under 30 years of age, men resort to tactile contact more often than women. At a later age, women take over the initiative for touching in opposite-sex couples. Researchers have also found that men prefer to touch their hands, while women prefer to touch the hand itself (Hall J. & Veccia A., 1990).
However, men and women respond differently to touch, which is due to differences in socialization and, as a result, differences in the perception of their own status. For example, in a study conducted in one of the university libraries (USA), employees had to either touch or not touch the hands of students changing books. Those students whose hands were touched by employees reacted positively. They liked both the library itself and the librarians more than those students who were not touched by the employees. Students (men) did not respond with increased sympathy for the library and employees in response to touch (Fisher J. at all., 1976).
In another study, Cheryl Whitcher and Jeffrey Fisher demonstrated even more striking gender differences in responses to touch. Attendants at a university hospital in the eastern United States either extensively or barely touched patients during preoperative examinations. In fact, touching as such is part of the professional duties of medical staff, so there was nothing unusual in the very fact of touching. The researchers controlled only the independent variable - the frequency and duration of tactile contacts between staff and patients. The study plan included interviewing patients immediately after surgery and studying their mental and somatic state.
A survey and study of women's post-surgery experiences revealed a strikingly clear positive effect of intensive pre-surgery touch. Those patients who were actively touched reported being less afraid of surgery. Their blood pressure levels in the postoperative period were almost normal. In a word, in all respects their condition was better than that of those patients whom doctors and nurses touched little.
The exact opposite effect of touch was demonstrated by male patients. Those of them who were touched a lot before the operation reacted sharply negatively to this, and in particular high level blood pressure. Whereas in the control group of male patients, who were touched little, the postoperative indicators were much better.
Thus, we can conclude that women tend to respond more positively to touch than men. Brenda Major suggests that the gender differences that exist here are analogous to status differences in responses to touch. When the status of two people is approximately the same or when it is uncertain, then men react to touch “like men,” i.e. negatively, and women react “like women,” i.e. positively. But if an obviously high-status person touches a low-status person, the latter’s reaction is usually positive, regardless of what gender he is. Consequently, both men and women perceive the touches of a high-status person in the same “feminine way,” that is, positively (Major V., 1981).
It is clear, therefore, that touch can inform an outside observer about the social status of interacting people. The one who touches the interlocutor clearly occupies a dominant position, having a higher status than the one who is touched. And, indeed, it is easy to imagine, for example, that a manager pats an employee on the shoulder or some other place. And it’s hard to imagine that an employee does the same thing when talking to a manager.
Thus, touch, like other nonverbal means of communication, can serve as a source of information both about the interlocutors and about the communication process itself.
Interpersonal distance
Interpersonal space, which is usually maintained between people during communication, as K. Izard believes, may be based on sociocultural norms governing tactile contacts (Izard K., 1980). Consequently, interpersonal distance can be considered as a means of communication that is derived from the tactile channel of communication. The space between people carries semantic, psychological meanings, which is why anthropologist Edward Hall (1966), probably the most authoritative specialist in the field of interpersonal distance research, gave it the name “psychology of space.” He also compiled the most well-known classification of distances, or zones of interpersonal interaction today. True, it mainly reflects the cultural norms that exist among North Americans, since it was created on the basis of observations of American behavior.
Hall identifies four main distances, which serve as an indicator of the type of relationship that connects interacting people, and which are named accordingly: intimate, personal, social, official (public).
Intimate area– this is the distance between people from direct contact to 0.5 meters. This distance indicates a very close relationship between the interlocutors. Of course, except in cases where strangers find themselves closely crowded against their will in public transport, in stores, at stadiums, etc. Such a forced reduction in interpersonal space usually causes a person to feel discomfort, since in a crowd there is close physical contact with complete strangers.
Personal zone – set in the range from 0.5 to 1.25 meters. It is typical for communication between people who have friendly relations, or between closely acquainted individuals.
The social zone is longer and extends from approximately 1.25 to 3.5 meters. This distance is maintained by people, for example, in business relationships or other social interactions. This distance is maintained, say, during the interaction between buyer and seller, student and teacher, etc. Moreover, the extreme limit of this zone indicates either a very formal or rather tense relationship.
Official (public) zone - it ranges from 3.5 to 7.5 meters. This distance indicates the completely official nature of communication. This may include distances during public speaking, communication with officials, solemn ritualized events.
Hall's classification suggests that the closest relationships involve the least interpersonal distance. Moreover, the distance between friends and good acquaintances tends to decrease, in contrast to the optimal distance maintained between strangers. Because intimacy and interpersonal distance are so closely related, we often use distance to convey to others how we feel about them. Through distance, you can also establish new and change old, already established relationships. If, for example, you want to establish a closer relationship with a person for some reason, then most likely, when communicating with him, you will try to reduce the distance between him and yourself. Conversely, when you don't like a person, you are likely to behave differently and "keep your distance."
This behavioral effect was confirmed in research, and, in particular, in an experiment by Howard Rosenfeld, who asked participants (students) to communicate with some interlocutor (usually also a student, a research assistant). In one case, the students had to show their interlocutor their friendly disposition, in the other, they had to avoid showing friendly feelings. In the first situation, the students sat a meter to one and a half meters from the research assistant, in the second - two to two and a half meters (Rosenfeld G., 1965).
Here it is necessary to immediately clarify that for some people the “sense of distance” may be impaired. This either manifests itself in the fact that the interlocutor, without realizing it, comes so close that he literally breathes in your face, which, of course, forces you to retreat step by step. And then from the outside your conversation will resemble a two-step dance. Another manifestation of the “broken sense of distance” is found in the opposite tendency, when the interlocutor prefers to talk from a distance of three meters or more, so that you have to strain both your hearing and your voice to hear and respond to him.
Of course, this interlocutor of yours may turn out to be a person with a completely healthy and normal sense of distance, but a native of Latin America, the Mediterranean, India or other countries with a high population density. In all these countries and regions, a smaller interpersonal space is established than in northern Europe or North America (Atwater I., 1988). In general, the following pattern can be seen here: the greater the population density in a country, the smaller the interpersonal distance people establish when communicating. And vice versa. This pattern is reflected in traditions and cultural norms.
Interpersonal distance can communicate more than just the degree of closeness between people or the type of social interaction. It also serves as an indicator of the social status of communicating people. People of equal status usually stand closer friend friend than people with different social status The greater the difference in people’s statuses, the larger the interpersonal zone is established between them. Moreover, if a low-status individual usually always “keeps his distance,” then a high-status individual can allow himself to independently determine the interpersonal space in relationships with a low-status individual. As we see, in in this case The same trend appears as in the use of touch.
In addition, some authors report that the interpersonal zone depends to some extent on the gender and age of the interacting people. For example, children and old people stay closer to the interlocutor, while teenagers, young people and middle-aged people prefer to be at a greater distance from the interlocutor. Women usually sit or stand closer to the interlocutor (regardless of his gender) than men (Atwater I., 1988).
In general, people with a normal sense of distance usually feel comfortable in those cases when they are at a distance from each other that corresponds to their ideas about both the degree of closeness and familiarity between them, and about the type existing at the moment social relations– in a word, their ideas about social norms.
The development of communication technologies, which provide the ability to communicate using electronic means, is aimed at bringing people closer together and gives loved ones the opportunity to see and hear each other from different parts of the globe. But right now, despite the achievements of civilization, we, more than ever before, feel loneliness And emotional emptiness.
Remember Juan Mann, founder of the Free Hugs movement, who suffered so much without human contact that he offered to hug strangers on the street? Try to compare yourself to Mann. How often do you feel lonely, craving more tenderness than you receive? Maybe you want your spouse or partner to show more and better love? If any of this sounds familiar to you, then you are experiencing a common psychological problem, known as tactile hunger.
For normal functioning, we need to satisfy hunger, thirst and regular rest, but this list of needs is rarely mentioned tactile contact That's why we often neglect the importance of hugs, handshakes and kisses, even though research shows that affection is right behind food, water and rest on the list of needs. Touch is essential because it brings an emotional and physical sensation that cannot be achieved any other way. Just as neglect of physiological needs leads to harmful consequences, tactile hunger can have a devastating effect on health: over time, anxiety increases and depressive thoughts appear.
Harry Harlow studied newborn monkeys weaned from their biological mother. They preferred mannequins that were made of soft material, although they did not provide them with adequate nutrition. The dummy, which could provide them with enough food, but was made of wire and steel, was rarely chosen by the cubs.
As one might expect, the monkeys’ desire for emotional comfort exceeded the need for food. The same goes for people. During World War II, children who found themselves in orphanages without maternal affection soon died.
Of course, there are times when, as we grow older, we ourselves resist contact because we strive to separate ourselves and gain independence. But even then we experience tactile hunger, and its main consequence in the future of life is the pathological feeling that we are not worthy of love.
A recent study of 509 adult men and women examined the mechanism of tactile hunger and associated social and health problems. The results were unexpected. People with high levels of tactile hunger are less happy, more lonely, more likely to experience depression and stress, and have poorer overall health than people low in affection. They have less social support and lower relationship satisfaction. They are more likely to experience anxiety disorders and other secondary immune disorders (acquired rather than inherited). They are more prone to alexithymia, a condition that reduces the ability to express and interpret emotions. Finally, they tend to develop a detached lifestyle with little chance of building secure and lasting relationships.
These findings do not establish that tactile hunger causes all of these negative states, only that people who experience rejection are more prone to them. If you're one of those people, chances are this evidence doesn't surprise you. Physical contact is necessary for healthy image life, and we suffer when we don’t get it.
Even married couples suffer from tactile hunger due to a lack of genuine affection. For example, a husband may pay more attention to his career than to his wife, and a wife may be more interested in the lives of her friends than her husband, with corresponding consequences in emotional expression towards each other.
Sociologists have found that residents of the United States and Great Britain suffer from tactile hunger more than anyone else in the world. Those least affected by this problem are Greece, France, Italy and Spain. In the Mediterranean, it is normal for people to kiss and hug when meeting and parting. When traveling to African countries, you may find that strangers are always ready to invade your personal space with a hug. In comparison, in American society the topic of touching is taboo due to the fine line between friendly touching and harassment, so from an early age they are encouraged to stay in their bubble.
Dr Tiffany Field, who has spent many years studying the benefits of human touch, explains:
“Many forms of touch help relieve pain, anxiety, depression and aggressive behavior, lower heart rate and blood pressure and improve air circulation in asthmatics; Boost immune function and promote healing. So many benefits and no side effects!”
She and her colleagues found that children whose parents showed less affection were doomed to grow up to be more verbally aggressive than children whose parents were more affectionate. She explains that animals with sensory deprivation eventually develop aggressive behavior, and humans face the same consequences.
Fortunately, you are not doomed and do not have to endure tactile hunger forever. Each of us has the opportunity to receive more love and tenderness. Remove it right now mobile phone and share this moment with a loved one.
Article prepared By materials:
- Michael Gregory, Skin Hunger: 3 compelling ways to overcome loneliness. Self-development for introverts and highly sensitive people, May 6, 2015.
- Kory Floyd, What lack of affection can do to you. Psychology Today, August 31, 2013.
Material from Wikipedia - the free encyclopedia
Tactile communication is a way of communication and interaction between people and animals through the sense of touch. Tactile-kinesthetic data comes from sensory receptors that are found in the skin, joints, muscles, tendons and in the inner ear. feeling provides information about the outside world and forms ideas about the position of the body in space. In addition to providing information about surfaces and textures, touch, or the tactile sense, is a component of what is also called non-verbal or non-visual. Touch is extremely important to humans and is essential for expressing physical intimacy. With the help of communication, a person can attract attention, express his attitude towards the interlocutor, establish contact, but can also cause negative emotions: Reducing psychological distance makes some people uncomfortable.
The meaning of touch can be positive, playful, ritual, intentional and accidental. It can be either sexual (kissing) or distracting (for example, tickling). Touch is the first sense that develops in the embryo. The development of tactile senses in the embryo and their relationship to the development of other senses, such as vision, has become the subject of large quantities research. According to scientists, infants had greater problems with survival if they did not have a developed sense of touch, even if they had the ability to see and hear. It should not be forgotten that people's attitudes towards touch differ from person to person. different countries. Also, the socially acceptable level of touching varies across cultures.
Types of tactile communication
Social/polite touch
The moment of transition from one category of tactile sense to another may be blurred due to cultural characteristics. For example, there are many places in the United States where touching the forearm is considered socially correct and polite. However, in the Midwest this type of communication is not always acceptable. The very first contact with a person in business usually begins with a touch, namely a handshake. The way a person shakes hands can say a lot about them and their personality. Jones reveals the essence of tactile communication as the most intimate and engaging form of communication that helps people maintain good relationships with each other. Jones collaborated with Yarbrough to study the frequency of touching and the touching that occurs between individuals. The frequency of touch can be divided into two different types, namely repetitive and strategic. Repetitive touching is a type of touching where one person touches and another person responds with the same gesture. Most of these touches are considered positive. Strategic touching is a series of touches, usually with an ulterior motive, used to get a person to do what another wants. Typically, repeated touches are personal or single touches. They must be interpreted in the context of what was said and determined by the set of social circumstances at the time the person was touched. is defined as a polite way of maintaining interactions with strangers, without engaging in interpersonal relationships and without having to react to the stranger's touch. Goffman presents an “elevator” study to explain this phenomenon: it is unusual for people to look at, talk to, or touch the person standing next to them. But in the case when the elevator room is so crowded that people “touch” each other, they maintain their indifference so as not to influence those around them.
Friendly/warm touch
In a friendly environment, touching is more common for women than for men. Whitcher and Fisher conducted a study to find out whether the use of psychotherapeutic touch to reduce anxiety differs between the sexes. Nurses were instructed to touch their patients for a minute while the patients studied the brochure during a routine preoperative procedure. Women took it positively, while men did not. It was suggested that men equated touching with being treated as subordinate or dependent. Touch among family members has been shown to influence their behavior. There are many factors at play in family relationships. Often, as a child grows, the amount of parental touch decreases.
Love touch
Violence
Touching in intimate relationships can at times be violent. McEwan and Johnson classified violent touching into two categories: intimate terrorism and couple violence. Intimate terrorism is characterized as a need for control and dominance in relationships, which increases in frequency and escalates over time. Conventional violence among couples, on the other hand, is often the result of petty conflict. Such violence is less common and less severe, and does not gain momentum over time. There are two main differences between intimate terrorism and couple violence. Normal violence in couples occurs sporadically and does not escalate over time. One study conducted by Gaiser in 1990 provided further evidence that, in fact, men are more prone to nonverbal aggression and violence.
Sexy/stimulating
According to Givens (1999 study), the process of nonverbal communication and negotiation involves sending and receiving messages in an attempt to gain someone's approval or affection. Courtship, which can create love, is defined as nonverbal communication aimed at attracting sexual partner. During courtship, we exchange nonverbal communication gestures to communicate to each other that we need to get closer. The main signals on the path to intimacy are kissing and caresses.
The courtship period can be divided into 5 stages, which include the attention phase, the getting to know each other phase, the communication phase, the touching phase and the lovemaking phase. Tactile senses appear in the last two phases. Touch phase. The first touch may usually be "accidental" rather than intentional, done by touching a neutral part of the body. During this phase, the recipient either accepts the touch or rejects it with body movement. A hug is a standard way for a person to tell someone that they love them and perhaps need them too. Intent to Touch: A tactile code or hint in nonverbal communication is a hidden intention. Kissing is the final stage of the fourth phase of courtship. The last phase, lovemaking, which involves tactile stimulation known as light or protopathic touch. Any feelings of fear or anxiety can be eased by other touches, such as kissing or massage.
Touch values
A 1985 study of touch by Johnson and Yarborough identified 18 different meanings of touch, grouped into 7 types: positive (emotional) impact, play, control, ritual, mixed, purposeful, and casual.
Touch that has a positive impact
These touches convey positive emotions and occur mainly between people who are in close relationships. These touches can be further classified as supportive, approving, affiliative, attracted, or affectionate.
Touches of support: serve to show care, comfort, and protect a person. These touches are usually appropriate in situations where a person is in a state of anxiety.
Touches of approval: used to express gratitude.
Touches of joining: pay attention to the fact that any activity is carried out jointly, imply psychological closeness.
Sexual touching: expresses physical attractiveness or sexual attraction.
Touches of affection: express a person's general positive attitude, but more than simple recognition.
"Touches of the Game"
These touches serve to soften communication. "Touches of play" convey a double message, as they always imply a play signal, both verbal and non-verbal, which indicates that the behavior is not to be taken seriously. These touches can also be divided into impactful and aggressive.
Impact: serves to soften communication. The seriousness of the positive message is counteracted by the playful message.
Aggressive impact: Like impact, these touches are used to ease tension in communication, but a playful signal indicates aggression. These touches come only from one side, not from both.
Controlling touches
These touches are needed to guide the right direction behavior, attitude or condition of the recipient. The main feature of these touches is that almost all of them come from the person who is trying to exert influence. These touches can also be categorized as compliant, attention-getting, or responsive.
Compliant: attempts to direct another person's behavior, usually by influencing the other person's attitudes or feelings.
Attractive: needed to redirect the focus of the recipient’s perception to something.
Causing a reaction: Used to attract attention to indirectly solicit a response from another.
Ritual touch
This group includes touching when greeting and goodbye. They help make the transition to and from focused communication.
Accidental touches
These touches are perceived as unintentional and do not carry any meaning. They mostly consist of light touches.
Culture and touch
High culture is common in eastern countries. Middle Eastern, Asian, African and South American cultures are examples of high culture. Traditions play a significant role, take root and hardly change over time. Representatives of this type cultures know exactly when to use tactile communication, based on a strict nonverbal law that is universally used. According to research results, in some types of culture touching is quite common (contact culture), while in others it may be absent (distant culture). Low-contact cultures include North Americans, Asians and Northern Europeans. Representatives of these cultures are at a certain distance from each other when communicating, and Asians use a greater distance than North Americans and Northern Europeans. Contact cultures include Latin American and Southern European cultures.
Write a review about the article "Tactile communication"
Notes
Links
- Carney, R., Hall A, and LeBeau L. (2005). Beliefs about the nonverbal expression of social power. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 29(2),118.
- Phyllis Davis: The Power of Touch - The Basis for Survival, Health, Intimacy, and Emotional Well-Being
- DeVito J., Guerrero, L. and Hecht, M. (1999). The nonverbal communication reader: classic and contemporary readings. (2nd ed). Illinois: Waveland Press.
- Geiser, J.L. "An Explanation of the Relationship of Nonverbal Aggression with Verbal Aggression, Nonverbal Immediacy Assertiveness, and Responsiveness." eidr.wvu.edu/files/947/geiser_j_etd.pdf.
- Givens, David B. (2005). Love Signals: A Practical Field Guide to the Body Language of Courtship, St. Martin's Press, New York.
- Guerrero, L. (2004), Chicago Sun-Times, “Women like man’s touch, but there’s a catch. They prefer to see it on another man, research shows,” 11-12.
- Hall, E. T. The Silent Language (1959). New York: Anchor Books, 1990
- Harper, J. (2006), The Washington Times, “Men hold the key to their wives’ calm”, A10.
- Harper, R. G., Wiens, A. N. and Matarazzo J. D. Nonverbal communication: The State of the Art. Wiley Series on Personality Processes (1978). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
- Hayward V, Astley OR, Cruz-Hernandez M, Grant D, Robles-De-La-Torre G. Haptic interfaces and devices. Sensor Review 24(1), pp. 16–29 (2004).
- Holden, R. (1993). How to utilize the power of laughter, humor and a winning smile at work. Employee Counseling Today, 5, 17-21.
- Jandt, F. E. Intercultural Communication (1995). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.
- Ashley Montagu: Touching: The Human Significance of the Skin, Harper Paperbacks, 1986
- Robles-De-La-Torre G. & Hayward V. Force Can Overcome Object Geometry In the perception of Shape Through Active Touch. Nature 412 (6845):445-8 (2001).
- Robles-De-La-Torre G. The Importance of the Sense of Touch in Virtual and Real Environments. IEEE Multimedia 13(3), Special issue on Haptic User Interfaces for Multimedia Systems, pp. 24–30 (2006).
- Van Swol, L. (2003). The effects of nonverbal mirroring on perceived persuasiveness, agreement with an imitator, and reciprocity in a group discussion. Communication Research, 30(4), 20.
An excerpt characterizing tactile communication
De boire, de battre,Et d'etre un vert galant...
[Having triple talent,
drink, fight
and be kind...]
– But it’s also complicated. Well, well, Zaletaev!..
“Kyu...” Zaletaev said with effort. “Kyu yu yu...” he drawled, carefully protruding his lips, “letriptala, de bu de ba and detravagala,” he sang.
- Hey, it’s important! That's it, guardian! oh... go go go! - Well, do you want to eat more?
- Give him some porridge; After all, it won’t be long before he gets enough of hunger.
Again they gave him porridge; and Morel, chuckling, began to work on the third pot. Joyful smiles were on all the faces of the young soldiers looking at Morel. The old soldiers, who considered it indecent to engage in such trifles, lay on the other side of the fire, but occasionally, raising themselves on their elbows, they looked at Morel with a smile.
“People too,” said one of them, dodging into his overcoat. - And wormwood grows on its root.
- Ooh! Lord, Lord! How stellar, passion! Towards the frost... - And everything fell silent.
The stars, as if knowing that now no one would see them, played out in the black sky. Now flaring up, now extinguishing, now shuddering, they busily whispered among themselves about something joyful, but mysterious.
X
The French troops gradually melted away in a mathematically correct progression. And that crossing of the Berezina, about which so much has been written, was only one of the intermediate stages in the destruction of the French army, and not at all a decisive episode of the campaign. If so much has been and is being written about the Berezina, then on the part of the French this happened only because on the broken Berezina Bridge, the disasters that the French army had previously suffered evenly here suddenly grouped together at one moment and into one tragic spectacle that remained in everyone’s memory. On the Russian side, they talked and wrote so much about the Berezina only because, far from the theater of war, in St. Petersburg, a plan was drawn up (by Pfuel) to capture Napoleon in a strategic trap on the Berezina River. Everyone was convinced that everything would actually happen exactly as planned, and therefore insisted that it was the Berezina crossing that destroyed the French. In essence, the results of the Berezinsky crossing were much less disastrous for the French in terms of the loss of guns and prisoners than Krasnoye, as the numbers show.
The only significance of the Berezina crossing is that this crossing obviously and undoubtedly proved the falsity of all plans for cutting off and the justice of the only possible course of action demanded by both Kutuzov and all the troops (mass) - only following the enemy. The crowd of Frenchmen fled with an ever-increasing force of speed, with all their energy directed towards achieving their goal. She ran like a wounded animal, and she could not get in the way. This was proven not so much by the construction of the crossing as by the traffic on the bridges. When the bridges were broken, unarmed soldiers, Moscow residents, women and children who were in the French convoy - all, under the influence of the force of inertia, did not give up, but ran forward into the boats, into the frozen water.
This aspiration was reasonable. The situation of both those fleeing and those pursuing was equally bad. Remaining with his own, each in distress hoped for the help of a comrade, for a certain place he occupied among his own. Having given himself over to the Russians, he was in the same position of distress, but he was on a lower level in terms of satisfying the needs of life. The French did not need to have correct information that half of the prisoners, with whom they did not know what to do, despite all the Russians’ desire to save them, died from cold and hunger; they felt that it could not be otherwise. The most compassionate Russian commanders and hunters of the French, the French in Russian service could not do anything for the prisoners. The French were destroyed by the disaster in which the Russian army was located. It was impossible to take away bread and clothing from hungry, necessary soldiers in order to give it to the French who were not harmful, not hated, not guilty, but simply unnecessary. Some did; but this was only an exception.
Behind was certain death; there was hope ahead. The ships were burned; there was no other salvation but a collective flight, and all the forces of the French were directed towards this collective flight.
The further the French fled, the more pitiful their remnants were, especially after the Berezina, on which, as a result of the St. Petersburg plan, special hopes were pinned, the more the passions of the Russian commanders flared up, blaming each other and especially Kutuzov. Believing that the failure of the Berezinsky Petersburg plan would be attributed to him, dissatisfaction with him, contempt for him and ridicule of him were expressed more and more strongly. Teasing and contempt, of course, were expressed in a respectful form, in a form in which Kutuzov could not even ask what and for what he was accused. They didn't talk to him seriously; reporting to him and asking his permission, they pretended to perform a sad ritual, and behind his back they winked and tried to deceive him at every step.
All these people, precisely because they could not understand him, recognized that there was no point in talking to the old man; that he would never understand the full depth of their plans; that he would answer with his phrases (it seemed to them that these were just phrases) about the golden bridge, that you cannot come abroad with a crowd of vagabonds, etc. They had already heard all this from him. And everything he said: for example, that we had to wait for food, that people were without boots, it was all so simple, and everything they offered was so complex and clever that it was obvious to them that he was stupid and old, but they were not powerful, brilliant commanders.
Especially after the joining of the armies of the brilliant admiral and the hero of St. Petersburg, Wittgenstein, this mood and staff gossip reached its highest limits. Kutuzov saw this and, sighing, just shrugged his shoulders. Only once, after the Berezina, he became angry and wrote the following letter to Bennigsen, who reported separately to the sovereign:
“Due to your painful seizures, please, Your Excellency, upon receipt of this, go to Kaluga, where you await further orders and assignments from His Imperial Majesty.”
But after Bennigsen was sent away, Grand Duke Konstantin Pavlovich arrived to the army, making the beginning of the campaign and being removed from the army by Kutuzov. Now the Grand Duke, having arrived at the army, informed Kutuzov about the displeasure of the sovereign emperor for the weak successes of our troops and for the slowness of movement. The Emperor himself intended to arrive at the army the other day.
An old man, as experienced in court affairs as in military affairs, that Kutuzov, who in August of the same year was chosen as commander-in-chief against the will of the sovereign, the one who removed the heir and the Grand Duke from the army, the one who, with his power, contrary the will of the sovereign, ordered the abandonment of Moscow, this Kutuzov now immediately realized that his time was over, that his role had been played and that he no longer had this imaginary power. And he understood this not just from court relationships. On the one hand, he saw that military affairs, the one in which he played his role, was over, and he felt that his calling had been fulfilled. On the other hand, at the same time he began to feel physical fatigue in his old body and the need for physical rest.
On November 29, Kutuzov entered Vilna - his good Vilna, as he said. Kutuzov was governor of Vilna twice during his service. In the rich, surviving Vilna, in addition to the comforts of life that he had been deprived of for so long, Kutuzov found old friends and memories. And he, suddenly turning away from all military and state concerns, plunged into a smooth, familiar life as much as he was given peace by the passions seething around him, as if everything that was happening now and was about to happen in the historical world did not concern him at all.
Chichagov, one of the most passionate cutters and overturners, Chichagov, who first wanted to make a diversion to Greece, and then to Warsaw, but did not want to go where he was ordered, Chichagov, known for his bold speech with the sovereign, Chichagov, who considered Kutuzov benefited himself, because when he was sent in the 11th year to conclude peace with Turkey in addition to Kutuzov, he, making sure that peace had already been concluded, admitted to the sovereign that the merit of concluding peace belonged to Kutuzov; This Chichagov was the first to meet Kutuzov in Vilna at the castle where Kutuzov was supposed to stay. Chichagov in a naval uniform, with a dirk, holding his cap under his arm, gave Kutuzov his drill report and the keys to the city. That's contemptuous respectful attitude youth to the old man who had lost his mind was expressed to the highest degree in the entire appeal of Chichagov, who already knew the charges leveled against Kutuzov.
While talking with Chichagov, Kutuzov, among other things, told him that the carriages with dishes captured from him in Borisov were intact and would be returned to him.
- C"est pour me dire que je n"ai pas sur quoi manger... Je puis au contraire vous fournir de tout dans le cas meme ou vous voudriez donner des diners, [You want to tell me that I have nothing to eat. On the contrary, I can serve you all, even if you wanted to give dinners.] - Chichagov said, flushing, with every word he wanted to prove that he was right and therefore assumed that Kutuzov was preoccupied with this very thing. Kutuzov smiled his thin, penetrating smile and, shrugging his shoulders, answered: “Ce n"est que pour vous dire ce que je vous dis. [I want to say only what I say.]
In Vilna, Kutuzov, contrary to the will of the sovereign, stopped most of the troops. Kutuzov, as his close associates said, had become unusually depressed and physically weakened during his stay in Vilna. He was reluctant to deal with the affairs of the army, leaving everything to his generals and, while waiting for the sovereign, indulged in an absent-minded life.
Having left St. Petersburg with his retinue - Count Tolstoy, Prince Volkonsky, Arakcheev and others, on December 7, the sovereign arrived in Vilna on December 11 and drove straight up to the castle in a road sleigh. At the castle, despite severe frost, there were about a hundred generals and staff officers in full dress uniform and an honor guard of the Semenovsky regiment.
The courier, who galloped up to the castle in a sweaty troika, ahead of the sovereign, shouted: “He’s coming!” Konovnitsyn rushed into the hallway to report to Kutuzov, who was waiting in a small Swiss room.
A minute later, the thick, large figure of an old man, in full dress uniform, with all the regalia covering his chest, and his belly pulled up by a scarf, pumping, came out onto the porch. Kutuzov put his hat on the front, picked up his gloves and sideways, stepping with difficulty down the steps, stepped down and took in his hand the report prepared for submission to the sovereign.
Running, whispering, the troika still desperately flying by, and all eyes turned to the jumping sleigh, in which the figures of the sovereign and Volkonsky were already visible.
All this, out of a fifty-year habit, had a physically disturbing effect on the old general; He hurriedly felt himself with concern, straightened his hat, and at that moment the sovereign, emerging from the sleigh, raised his eyes to him, cheered up and stretched out, submitted a report and began to speak in his measured, ingratiating voice.
The Emperor glanced quickly at Kutuzov from head to toe, frowned for a moment, but immediately, overcoming himself, walked up and, spreading his arms, hugged the old general. Again, according to the old, familiar impression and in relation to his sincere thoughts, this hug, as usual, had an effect on Kutuzov: he sobbed.
The Emperor greeted the officers and the Semenovsky guard and, shaking the old man’s hand again, went with him to the castle.
Left alone with the field marshal, the sovereign expressed his displeasure to him for the slowness of the pursuit, for the mistakes in Krasnoye and on the Berezina, and conveyed his thoughts about the future campaign abroad. Kutuzov made no objections or comments. The same submissive and meaningless expression with which, seven years ago, he listened to the orders of the sovereign on the Field of Austerlitz, was now established on his face.
When Kutuzov left the office and walked down the hall with his heavy, diving gait, head down, someone’s voice stopped him.
“Your Grace,” someone said.
Kutuzov raised his head and looked for a long time into the eyes of Count Tolstoy, who stood in front of him with some small thing on a silver platter. Kutuzov did not seem to understand what they wanted from him.
Suddenly he seemed to remember: a barely noticeable smile flashed on his plump face, and he, bending low, respectfully, took the object lying on the platter. This was George 1st degree.
The next day the field marshal had dinner and a ball, which the sovereign honored with his presence. Kutuzov was awarded George 1st degree; the sovereign showed him the highest honors; but the sovereign’s displeasure against the field marshal was known to everyone. Decency was observed, and the sovereign showed the first example of this; but everyone knew that the old man was guilty and no good. When, at the ball, Kutuzov, according to Catherine’s old habit, upon the Emperor’s entrance into the ballroom, ordered the taken banners to be laid down at his feet, the Emperor frowned unpleasantly and uttered words in which some heard: “old comedian.”
The sovereign's displeasure against Kutuzov intensified in Vilna, especially because Kutuzov obviously did not want or could not understand the significance of the upcoming campaign.
When the next morning the sovereign said to the officers gathered at his place: “You saved more than just Russia; you saved Europe,” everyone already understood that the war was not over.
Only Kutuzov did not want to understand this and openly expressed his opinion that a new war could not improve the situation and increase the glory of Russia, but could only worsen its position and reduce the highest degree of glory on which, in his opinion, Russia now stood. He tried to prove to the sovereign the impossibility of recruiting new troops; spoke about the difficult situation of the population, the possibility of failure, etc.
In such a mood, the field marshal, naturally, seemed to be only a hindrance and a brake on the upcoming war.
To avoid clashes with the old man, a way out was found by itself, which consisted in, as at Austerlitz and as at the beginning of the campaign under Barclay, to remove from under the commander-in-chief, without disturbing him, without announcing to him that the ground of power on which he stood , and transfer it to the sovereign himself.
For this purpose, the headquarters was gradually reorganized, and all the significant strength of Kutuzov’s headquarters was destroyed and transferred to the sovereign. Tol, Konovnitsyn, Ermolov - received other appointments. Everyone said loudly that the field marshal had become very weak and was upset about his health.
Not much information can be found in Russian, although they have been studied in the West for a long time. This type of person is very sensitive to sensations and needs constant touch to be happy. However, we all need this condition to one degree or another. normal development children and adult happiness.
Not just sex
For some people, touch is their primary love language. That is, without constant physical contact (and we’re not just talking about sex), such a person will not subconsciously consider himself loved. Tactile contact- these are touches of different kinds. In good families, it is customary to hug and kiss each other when meeting. Do not limit yourself solely to sex, because you can stroke your loved one on the cheek, play with his hair, give a massage in accordance with various techniques. It all brings you closer together, especially if your partner expresses their love through touch.
Location and hidden love
In friendships, tactile contact is another way to express affection. It’s not for nothing that shaking hands is considered normal in many cultures. A touch on the shoulder also indicates strong sympathy. A friendly pat on the back makes the relationship informal and shows respect. Often love disguised as friendship is expressed through pampering children, such as tickling the object of affection or even lightly pinching. Moreover, such games are not alien to many adults.
Baby needs
Touch is also important in the relationship between child and mother. Children who are not touched or touched little often have mental retardation and developmental delays. Therefore, a child should not only have toys with a variety of textures (to make it interesting to touch), but also long-term tactile interaction with people who love him. Tactile means carried out through receptors on the skin.
The reason for some cheating
Harmonious sex life impossible without quality touches. And the more there are, the better. Many men go “to the left” not because they lack sex, variety, or are bored with the technique of performing the act. And because the wife does not give enough tenderness. They simply don’t believe in love, and therefore they are looking for a girl who loves touching. Moreover, if the contrast is strong, the man may abandon his family altogether.
Signals for others
Tactile contact is also an indicator of the publicity of the relationship. Holding your partner's hand in public, stroking their hair, or cuddling with them sends signals to people around you that you are in a relationship. If a man does not agree to minimal expressions of tenderness, this means that he does not perceive you as a serious partner. Of course, we are not talking about Muslim countries - cultural norms there are different.
Bottom line
Tactile contact is a way to express love, an urgent need for a child, a means of making sympathy obvious. It can also be a method of social declaration of relationships, that is, signaling to others that your partner is “busy.”
