Touch Much: Why is Platonic Affection so Taboo?

By Anna Hennings

When we're hungry, it's simple — we eat. When we're thirsty, we drink. But what about when you just want to and need to be touched? There are no touch cafés. Touch doesn't come as a gift with purchase at the Lancôme counter. And if you're not in a romantic relationship, how do you fill up your touch tank to full?

There are often not enough outlets for affection in platonic relationships. Friends provide emotional support, memorable nights out, advice and adventures, but few friendships are so close that it's comfortable and acceptable for you two to, say, snuggle on the couch together, or hold each other in a longer-than-usual embrace — one long enough to communicate sincerity but short enough not to be awkward. The line becomes especially blurred if you're of compatible sexual orientations, because, oh my god, then it must mean you like each other.

But wanting to be touched is a basic human need. (Without it, we're so much more susceptible to depression, stress, anxiety, loss in self-confidence and loss in drive and motivation!) And sadly though not surprisingly, we live in a touch-deprived culture that's comfortable with touch only if it has sexual meaning, if we're celebrating, if someone is consoling or being consoled, or if it involves raising our kids.

Outside of those exceptions, our culture looks at touch as suspect. We assume something's wrong, or make meaning where there isn't any. So, if none of those situations apply to us at the moment — if we are single, happy and not particularly close (physically or emotionally) to family — how can we meet our touch needs without that uh-oh factor?

Yeah, of course there are inappropriate ways to meet touch needs, through hookers, massages with happy endings and the like. But how about giving new meaning to things most of us already do every day? How about hugging, but without an agenda and where no one's holding on too tight or for too long? The average hug is 1.7 seconds long. And after about 4 seconds, most people become squeamish. 

Why don't we eliminate the space between our hearts, stop burping each other with those manly pats on the back, and embrace for — gasp! — 5 seconds, maybe even 10? That time is nothing compared to how long we spend writing emails, updating our Facebook statuses or how long it takes to check-in somewhere on Foursquare.

How about massages — from friends or professionals — with no strings attached? How about encounters — like hooking arms with your girlfriend when out shopping — where touch has no specific reason or communicates no specific intention other than hey, this just feels nice? What is so awkward and socially uncomfortable about that?

Isn't it also possible that, since we are trying to survive in a touch-deprived culture, part of what the dating scene satisfies is our need to be touched? We need touch to thrive. And as backwards as it may sound, we are being told that to do so, it's more acceptable to jump into bed with someone than it is to sit closely next to your best male friend on the couch with your head in his lap.

Because it's not as socially acceptable or natural to go to even one of your closest friends and ask to be the little spoon, is our simple need to be touched fueling the mindset that we're not okay unless we have a man? Are we so desperate to feel loved that we settle or fall for the wrong people?

Perhaps like the 1980s AT&T ads proclaim: we just need to reach.

Image via gbaku's Flickr

POSTED IN: LIFE
Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:15 (GMT+00)
5 Responses
1.

Nice! Yeah, I prefer being around my friends who are more touchy-feely and willing to hug and kiss without any worry about there being 'something more' behind it. Our puritan heritage has all kinds of drawbacks.

K. A. Laity
Thu, 25-Feb-2010 19:15 GMT
2.

This is precisely why I enjoy visiting other European countries such as Italy and France. Where public display of affection and well, just affection are widely practiced and accepted.

MC
Thu, 25-Feb-2010 21:27 GMT
3.

Great article! I reckon more people should arrange cuddle parties and spread the word that touching doesn't need to be sexual.

Lori Smith
Fri, 26-Feb-2010 12:13 GMT
4.

Thank you for this analysis. I am from a culture that views touch as a natural and normal component of human interaction. I think touch has turned Americans into sex crazed, pet obsessed zombies begging for an opportunity to touch someone. We assign too much meaning to touch. I love affection and offer it up to coworkers, female friends, male friends, children. I think a reassuring hand on the arm, long embrace and the over closeness is healing and restorative.

Anacostia Yogi
Sun, 25-Jul-2010 14:40 GMT
5.

I think that a lot of people who are not in relationship suffer from lack of touches. You are absolutely right that only few people are comfortable to hold each other in a longer-than-usual embrace. Thanks for sharing interesting insights. Irena from web hosting reviews

Irena
Thu, 24-Feb-2011 21:09 GMT

Add Comment

Note: Your email address will be verified but will never be published on the site.

If you are a registered user, please Sign In.




The opinions expressed by the author and commenters are their own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BitchBuzz or any employer or organisation. The aforementioned are not responsible for the accuracy of content published.

social feed

@BitchBuzz: The [Digital] Revolution Will Be Gendered - from @katelaity on BitchBuzz Tech http://t.co/5bkxZo0x
09 Feb @ 10:46 GMT

search



buzz we love

Bitchin' Lifestyle
Vikki Chowney
Bangs and a Bun
Vintage Patisserie
Pop Justice
The Other Woman
Pamflet
Gala Darling
Red Velvet
Shape What's to Come
Bird's Eye View
Gala Darling
Bake & Destroy
Kris Atomic
Mark Johns
Garfunkel & Oates
India Knight
Kate Nash
Erin Gibson
Sarah Lacy
Vegansaurus
The Boss of You
Meantime Brewery
Make and Do with Perri