Comment by cbd1984 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by cbd1984 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

And you have to take into account the fact culture plays a role.

What's your personal space? It varies based on where you were born and where you grew up. Invading someone's personal space is perceived as aggressive and noisome and perhaps even threatening, which makes it even worse to assume it must be based on pathology rather than "This person was born in Italy, I'm from Norway" or similar.

Similarly, saying things like "culture doesn't excuse bigotry" is rather pointless, given that culture defines what you consider to be bigotry in the first place. What's perfectly tolerant and open-minded in Russia might be unspeakable in Liberia and vice-versa.

My point is, add a culture out of step with the mainstream notions of propriety to someone with even a relatively mild social dysfunction (not necessarily diagnosable!) and you have a "harasser" in the making, especially if everyone castigates them on the first offense and nobody tells them what they're actually doing wrong.

Here's a funny thing about culture. It distorts a lot, so some cultures accept public stonings and lashings, while others won't let a parent slap a child.

Yet what constitutes abuse is universal, and what constitutes positive social interaction is universal. In every culture in the world, a man putting his hand on another's shoulder is a gesture of dominance, and putting his hand inside a woman's knee is a gesture of intimacy.

The size of personal spaces changes per culture. Just as some cultures speak louder than others. Yet it always follows the same dynamics, positive and negative.

> Yet what constitutes abuse is universal, and what constitutes positive social interaction is universal.

Only if you define it down to the basics. Some jokes are considered abusive in one culture and funny, or at least innocuous, in another. You mentioned one man putting his hand on another man's shoulder, but back-slapping is certainly viewed differently across cultures, and then there are the subtle rules around eye contact which usually aren't written anywhere at all except maybe sociological research papers. All of those things can make someone feel rather uncomfortable if they meet exactly the wrong person, perhaps after everyone's had a few drinks.

Abuse is culturally dependent. Some things are regarded as universally wrong, perhaps, but vast swathes of things aren't universal in the slightest.

Citations, please. I've grown up and lived in many cultures. Manners change. Abuse does not. Invoking cultural relativism is not going to work here.

Let me explain: abuse is about identifying a boundary and then crossing it, deliberately, and repeatedly, to gain control over another person.

The boundaries shift from person to person and culture to culture. Yet it always the same dynamic, and you can see it, and you can stop it.

>In every culture in the world, a man putting his hand on another's shoulder is a gesture of dominance,

What an example of cultural confusion on display. Because this sounds absurd to me. Here, a hand on the shoulder, is a clear sign of friendship and would be relieve tension in a situation.

It is a gesture of dominance that most men will accept and even enjoy, the same way as a dog accepts and enjoys being patted on the head. It's not an aggressive act, but it is dominant. This is quite clear from the way men respond to it, which is almost universally the same: by relaxing. (Hence you describe it as relieving tension.) However try it with someone who thinks they are more important than you, and it will cause hostility.

There are other universal dominance signals. For instance, keeping eye contact without smiling. Or, interrupting someone who is speaking. Or, being late for a meeting. Or, laughing at someone who makes a mistake.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com