Blogg Four: Touch - Tickling

This week I frantically shuffled through the topic of physical touch and found more aspects and potential discussions than I could ever dream of covering in my fourth blogg. After painful deliberation, I decided to pull some research on what I believe to be the most miserable, uncontrollable, bizarre physical sensation to be inflicted upon the human race – tickling. Seriously. Don’t you think it’s a little warped to have someone take you by surprise and apply pressure up and down the sides of your body? And even more warped that we laugh uncontrollably and twitch involuntarily in response? While some of you may enjoy a good tickle-fight with your roomies, I do not. I hardly think it pleasant to be attacked in such a way – by anyone. I do not wish to participate on either side of this heinous game. Ever.

Anyway, I found this article in the New York Times that reported several different studies on tickling. Feel free to take a look.

http://www.nytimes.com/1997/06/03/science/anatomy-of-a-tickle-is-serious-business-at-the-research-lab.html?pagewanted=all

The one I found particularly interesting involved 32 blindfolded undergraduate students who believed they would be tickled once by a person, then once by a machine. But in reality, both tickles were performed by a person (how do you get that job? Ah, the field of ‘research’). Since students laughed and squirmed even when they thought they were alone being tickled by the machine, the researchers concluded that ticklish laughter is not a social interaction but rather a simple reflex, “much the same as the one a doctor elicits from a patient’s knee with a little rubber hammer.”

Opposing this conclusion is Dr. Fridlund; he claims that people cannot tickle themselves because ticklish laughter is social and interactive, requiring tension between two or more people.

In my experience, as I cringe at even the thought of being tickled, I would say that laughter and movement are a natural – though admittedly unexplainable – reflex. I cannot control my reaction when someone grabs me. A shudder or tingling goes up my spine if they so much as graze the ‘right spot’. In an all out assault, which were much more common in my childhood (older brothers being the perpetrators, of course), I wriggle and laugh and scream. Powerless. Hopeless.

I looked through Morris’s major categories of touch, trying to locate ‘tickling,’ but to no avail. If it were up to me, as it appears to be (thanks a lot, Morris), I would place it under the “mock-attack” category. These are aggressive-looking behaviors performed in a nonaggressive manner. Again I will mention my older brothers, whom I love dearly; growing up they communicated love in this way, though, through punches and pseudo-wrestling holds, both with each other and unfortunately with me. I learned from them, probably because my survival required such, and to this day I take great pride in a well-executed ‘dead-leg’ shot (and then I take great measures to protect myself from the fist attached to the voice of, “You will regret that decision.”). However, this ‘I-thought-acts-of-violence-was-a-love-language” life that I had embraced caught many of my new pledge sisters off guard, to say the least, when I had to adjust to communicating love to girls my own age, many of whom I had only known for days or weeks. Poor Mary-Katherine Leslie…such a bruised little sweetheart. She taught me to hug instead of shoulder punch my greetings. I am thankful, and so are many others.

All in all, I think tickling is dreadful, but sometimes funny when it involves being a spectator to someone else’s misery. I also think “mock-attack” touch is entertaining, again as a spectator.

By the way, the article mentions the Tickle-Me-Elmo toy...twisted. That's all.

Blogg Three: Territoriality - Church Pews

“See, the LORD your God has given you the land. Go up and take possession of it as the LORD, the God of your fathers, told you. Do not be afraid; do not be discouraged.” Deuteronomy 1:21

Strange start, you say? Maybe. It’s a stretch, you think? Perhaps.

But the truth is, I think some old people at my hometown Baptist church have taken this verse to heart…except “the land” that God apparently has given them is “their pew.”

Now, listen, these are good people. They love the Lord and attend church regularly. My grandparents are in fact the leaders of the whole crew, probably. Eugene and June (do you get better grandparent names?) are quite popular indeed among the senior adults; everyone knows who they are…and exactly where they sit on Sunday mornings. On any given Sunday, unless June is having allergy issues, they can be found sitting on the left side, second row from the back, toward the aisle. And how do I know this? This pew, and the surrounding pews, have been silently ‘claimed’ by the old people. It is their secondary territory. And everyone knows it.

Except one poor people group: visitors. God bless them. When these nice families enter the worship center, they peruse the pews to find open seating. Their eyes fixate on an empty space near the back, and they approach it only to feel the burning glare at their backs from the old people around them. Though there are no markers, not even a ‘worship guide’ or a Bible, placed obviously across the seat as a reservation, these visitors now know they are not allowed to sit there. This scene is quite embarrassing to watch, and I know it has to be uncomfortable for the visitors. I feel bad for them. Especially when it’s my grandparents whose seat has been temporarily hijacked…because I know they, or someone they know, will ‘take care of it.’ I remind you, these are good, loving, God-fearing, Kingdom-living people. But don’t sit in their pew. They’ll still love you, but they WILL ask you to move. As terrible as that is..it happens. Welcome. We’re so glad you’re here. But move. One particular Sunday, a couple came to rest on my grandparents’ pew. And one of the sweetest old men I know wheeled his Rascal over to them and said in the nicest voice, “Excuse me, that’s where the Shugarts sit.” And that was all. And the couple moved. My mom and I were mortified, but at this point, what can you do?

I know this kind of thing is common, the whole secondary territory idea. The you-should-know-better, this-is-my-seat, I’m-a-nasty-creature-of-habit type. It’s funny to me, as I observe behaviors at the start of a Sunday’s service, how ‘in-place’ everyone is. The land is claimed. Deuteronomy 1:21. Check.

Blogg Two: Facial Behavior - Emoticons

As I was thinking about a topic for this week’s blogg, I received a text message. It was from one of the funniest people I know, and it looked like this:

Hey grl hope u r havin a gr8 day! :o)

My reaction? Genuine laughter, followed by a genuine “Eww that’s disgusting.” You see, I have a very good friend with whom I have a kind of ‘text lingo and emoticons’ competition, making fun of people who actually do communicate in such a ridiculous way. Basically we see who can compose the ‘nastiest’ message, in regard to abbreviations and emoticons. In between our ‘real’ text conversations we have these battles, and they often get out of control. We’ve decided text lingo is a slippery slope, and so we proceed with caution, usually calling it off with a “save meeeee” when it gets too out of control. These are some of the most hilarious conversations, if you’ll allow me to call them such, that I have ever had. Anyway, as I read this message, it hit me. Emoticons. Or as Emily and I lyke 2 call them, ‘emoticonzzz.’ These little characters – made of little keyboard characters – are supposed to be representations of our facial expressions, understood through written or typed communication.

Upon some research (yes, I unashamedly google-ed and wikipedia-ed ‘emoticons’) and deep ponderings, I have drawn a few conclusions and raised a few questions in this now highly interesting yet unexplored field of ‘nonverbal communication.’

First, how did we come to create these emoticons? How accurately do they actually represent our real-life facial expressions? Let’s take a look. I tested all of them, making faces to myself alone in my room as I blogg, so you should a) trust me and b) make fun of me.

Starting with the simple :-) and :-( , these emoticons were first used with the specific suggestion that they be used to express emotion by Scott Fahlman in 1982. Within months these character sequences had spread to the ARPANET (the early internet) and Usenet, and as we know today, served as the first spark of the emoticon wildfire that is devastating our population. ‘Reading’ them sideways, left to right, you will perceive a smiling face and a frowning face, representing happiness and sadness, respectively.

But let’s go deeper to capture the truly appreciated creativity in other popular emoticons, and let’s discover how they really can depict real human expressions.

Take this one =0 It represents ‘surprise’. Notice how the eyes are depicted as taller than the typical : as if opened wider, which we know to be a real-life indicator of surprise (with upward movement of the eyebrows). Also, the mouth is open, almost screaming surprise.

Or how about this one } : < It represents ‘anger’. We can tell when our friends are angry because their forehead furrows, like the symbol represents. And indeed, sometimes their mouths are pointed downward, or even pursed, as the sign suggests.

And finally, and we’ll take this one a little further, XD It represents extreme happiness. The eyes are squinted and the mouth is large, as if the whole face is engaged in hysterical laughter. We learned in class how to determine if a smile is genuine or fake. In a genuine smile, the corners of the mouth slant upward and the corners of the eyes slant downward, almost meeting. And, in this emoticon, the tips of the X and the D almost meet. So I’d say this is a very accurate portrayal of the very genuinely happy person.

Here are more for you to analyze on your own time, if you so wish.

:-D laughing ; ) winking/joking

: P silly :- / uneasy

:`( crying :-[ pouting

:-| bored | - I asleep

In the cases above, I have concluded that emoticons do actually look like our real-life facial expressions…but the question lingers – does the emoticon’s accuracy depend on our sincerity of emotion? Is there an emoticon for masking, or for neutralization, intensification, or deintensification? How would it look? I am open to answers or suggestions.

I would like to leave you with one of my favorite commercials. It has very little to do with emoticons, but very much to do with facial expressions. Well, kind of. I challenge you to use what we learned in class about genuine vs. fake smiles. I am pretty sure the airplane is genuine, but I don’t know about the headphones.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m56F4EKN9hg

Blogg One: Physical Attractiveness - Facebook Ads

Please believe that I am a dedicated student, despite my blog post at 2am on the due day. I can explain.

I’m in college.

But really, I don’t have any excuses. Only distractions. I will admit, indeed, that I spent the entire afternoon putting together baskets for my “grandlittles” in Chi Omega, which turned out to be a much more time consuming task than estimated – what was I thinking?! (If you’re Greeky, you know what I mean. If you aren’t, please, judge me.) Anyway, after the secret drop-off shenanigans tonight, I of course came home and was immediately, without warning or explanation, sucked into the vicious Facebook vortex. Inescapable. But, believe it or not, this ridiculous social network venture revealed a great blog topic for my first post…located in the right side margin of my page, as I stalked through the usual suspects, I kept noticing advertisements with pictures like these:

Accompanying these handsome little devils were titles like “Meet Cute Guys” or “Want an Honest Man?” or my personal favorite, “Christian Singles.” Advertisements aimed at college-aged females like myself (how they know I’m pathetically single still baffles me) pop up right and left, literally, as I go about my procrastinating. And they bother me. It’s uncomfortable, really.

The book tells us that “physical attractiveness may be the single most important factor in determining whom we choose as our friends, dates, lovers, and coworkers.” So what makes these advertising companies think I will find these men so physically attractive that I will click to their site? What is it about the nonverbal messages these guys are sending that makes them think they’re so convincing?

Let’s take the first guy, the one taking the picture of himself for his MySpace account – “Meet Cute Guys” guy. The book reports that women perceive men with facial hair as ‘mature, sophisticated, masculine, and more sexually appealing.’ Is the advertising company aware of this, or is it coincidence that this particular model got the spot on their ad?

Now for the second guy, the one laying down with no shirt on – “Want an Honest Man?” man. The book suggests we make several decisions about another person based on how they look; one of these decisions is ‘moral character.’ The advertising company knows honesty is a highly attractive quality, both in the social and task realm. So what about this man proves honesty? Is it his dark, intent eyes? Are there shady-looking men who also belong to this online dating website? Are congratulations in order for this man for looking especially honest?

Finally, the third guy, the one soaking up the sunshine outside of Draper – “Christian Singles” guy. Again I will reference the book’s suggestion that we make decisions about someone’s moral character, or perhaps in this case religious association, based on how they look. This advertising agency, targeting females on the Baylor network, knows that most of us are probably looking for Christian men. But what is it about this guy’s picture that lets me know he’s a Christian? His nice, gentle smile? At the risk of offending any ‘kampers’ out there, I’d venture to say this guy looks like the ideal Kanakuk counselor. And I find myself wondering, ‘Is that okay to say? What makes me think that?’ I suppose the book is right after all. I just gave this guy a summer job shepherding little kiddos without even talking to him.

As annoying as these ads are, I have a new appreciation for them, thanks to this class. Usually, that appreciation comes in the form of a small chuckle and a shake of the head. Followed by a quick prayer that I never become so desperate.