''ve just been reading comments to a post in another journal and it's made me come over a bit thoughtful. I'm posting my response here because it's going to get rather preachy I'm afraid and I don't think one should inflict that sort of thing on an unsuspecting fellow blogger.
So, the burden of the comments (not the original post) concerned the sincerity or otherwise of commenting on someone's else's dark-night of-the-soul type post with a mere *hugs*. Some commenters were of the opinion that such is the act of an unmitigated cad and a bounder, who cares nought for your pain and thinks only to boost their flagging ego with a spot of thoughtless self-publicity. Well, hang on there chaps, surely in this case insincerity is in the eye of the beholder. Unless you are acquainted with the person in Solid World and know them to be hugger or not, then you cannot be at all certain of their hugging motivation. A *hug* is a likely to be a genuine expression of heartfelt sympathy as it is a meaningless and self-serving gesture. Wouldn't you be happier in the long run if you assumed the former in all circumstances - an anti-*hug* stance hurts not the *hug*ger but the *hug*gee.
As a somewhat reticent Britisher, my equivalent of *hug* is more a sort of *tentative pat on the shoulder* and a muttered "there, there, old chap - now pull yourself together and we'll all have a nice cup of tea. Worse things happen at sea, what!" and who wants that kind of nonsense landing in their comments box as they weep bitter, weary tears of despair into their fine linen handkerchieves?
So, take the *hug* in the spirit you'd like it to have been given. Chances are, it was.
And now, open your hymn books and turn to page ...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment