Mainly that. Furthermore, the topics of mutual vulnerability (both parties are defenseless during a hug), joint attention, synchronicity in movement (which reinforces bonding) are ignored in favour things that are easier to replicate, such as the anxiolytic qualities of chest compression.
In a way, a good consensual hug is a powerful promise of support and protection.
Hugging has two distinct sides - emotional and sensorial. It feels kind of futile to do it for emotional reason (you do it just to please the other side, maybe) but it still feels good for sensorial one. It's like hugging a pleasant animal.
>Hugs are also beneficial and cause documented positive chemical changes in our bodies. No imaginary mystical forces or increased "vibrations" needed.
It's just a different theoretical framework for describing an observed phenomenon. Even if it's not technically correct, it can still be a good enough cognitive heuristic to help people intuit what's happening or how to influence it.
Think about it kind of like Newtonian mechanics, which are also not quite right but make predictions that are generally close enough for most of what we do in everyday life and much easier for people to work with intuitively.
I don't know what to make of this. Honestly, where I'm from (Canada), depending on the circle, it feels like hugs are nearly a social norm, even between people who've just been acquainted.
Some people lean toward the hug as a greeting or farewell, especially women. As a woman who doesn't like hugs, it's very uncomfortable for me. I used to work at an agency, and sometimes we'd even end up hugging clients after a big meeting.
Thanks tonyarkles, and to clarify: I'm not saying that it's OK for me to indiscriminately go around hugging people, either. I'm saying that in general the only people I hug are people that I know well enough to know that a hug will be OK from both sides.
reply