http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/09/obamas_good_and_bad_touch.htmlSeptember 15, 2014
Obama's Good and Bad Touch
By Deborah C. Tyler
During the earliest campaign to teach children about “good and bad touch” one of my children was fascinated by the subject and appointed herself as a bad touch detective. She asked, “Is that bad touch? Is that?” Once after being hugged and kissed by a very elderly great uncle with less than pristine breath, she asked, “Was that bad touch?” When told that touch was OK, she looked shocked, as if to say, “You mean there’s worse touch than that?”
One touch is worth a thousand words in communicating the feelings, beliefs, and values of the person taking the liberty to touch another person’s body. Good touch arises in the mental states of respect, honor, and love; bad touch arises out of disrespect, exploitation, and hate. While serving in his official capacity as Commander in Chief of the armed forces, Barack Obama bestowed consensual “good touch” on the parents of probable turncoat Bob Bergdahl. And in the same capacity he has repeatedly bestowed non-consensual, “bad touch” on the highest order of military heroes, recipients of the Medal of Honor
Psychologists call touch “haptic communication”, and it is understood according to the relationship between the persons involved in an [float=right]
[/float]incident of touching. In both the Bergdahl Rose Garden pro-jihad lovefest and the Medal of Honor award ceremonies, Obama’s touch occurred within the relationship category termed professional/functional.
Given the facts of Sgt. Bergdahl’s apparent desertion and collusion with the enemy, honor and decency dictated that the announcement on May 31, 2014 of the release of Sgt. Bergdahl, by the Commander in Chief in the presence of the soldier’s parents, should have been a dignified public statement. But honor and decency sent their regrets on that occasion. Not since a large segment of American citizens formed a confederacy and went to war against the United States has an American military commander acted so openly and aggressively against national security as did President Obama in the Bergdahl case -- not only in swapping a suspected deserter for a jihadist dream team, but in facilitating Bob Bergdahl’s treacherous behavior for the world to watch.
Mr. Bergdahl opened with a blatant insult to listeners’ intelligence by stating that his son was having a hard time remembering English. Bowe Bergdahl would have been thinking in English throughout his captivity and would certainly not have forgotten his native language. Besides, Bob Bergdahl spoke Arabic in the White House Rose Garden, not the Pashto language of his son’s Taliban captors, as the President smiled in appreciation.
The haptic communication between the Commander in Chief and the Bergdahls was reminiscent of rebellious adolescents marching in phalanx, their arms around each other’s waists. There was no separation of rank between the Commander-in-Chief and the sergeant’s parents. They appear as coconspirators in their own little world, hugging each other joyfully, diffusing responsibility among themselves for the wrongs they were committing. They touched at the trunks of their bodies, at their cores, rather than the more reserved level of handshake or light kiss. At the beginning of the photo op, Obama entered with his arm around the waist of Mrs. Bergdahl, seeming to push her out into the Rose Garden. The pressure of his touch seemed to say, “You can do this.” She appeared to have sufficient decency to seem uncomfortable. The three marched back into the White House, literally joined at the hip, their arms draped with familiarity around each other, new BFF’s.
Haptic communication research indicates that the dynamics of touch, including whether the touch is psychologically successful, are influenced by whether the interaction occurs in what is termed high or low cultural context. In high cultural context, individuals are strongly trained into cultural expectations regarding touch. High cultural contexts tend to be homogenous, all members know and accept the rules regarding touch. High cultural contexts have a strong sense of tradition. Members know and follow traditions which are based on a commonly accepted nonverbal code. Low cultural contexts tend to be heterogenous, with members following different traditions regarding touch.
[float=left]
[/float]The U.S. military is an example of extremely high context culture. The current commander of that military is ignorant and disrespectful of its traditions of haptic communication. The cluster-hug among Obama and the Bergdahls was in a military context. But none were behaving in observance of that military high culture. It was consensual “good touch” because President Obama and the Bergdahl’s were touching each other within the same anti-American low cultural context.
When the President bestows military honors, including the Medal of Honor, he invariably can be seen patting up and down the arms of the recipients immediately after presenting the medal. It is unseemly for the Commander in Chief to pat a service member who is standing in rigid attention in full dress uniform. The nonverbal message may be ambiguous. Is it condescending? Distanciating? Meant, clumsily, to communicate solidarity? In any case, the President’s penchant for patting military heroes haptically communicates his refusal to understand and accept commanding authority. Patting is usually associated with offering comfort, which must be patronizing to a military hero. Also, it is non-consensual because a Medal of Honor recipient cannot respond.
It is too late for the President to claim ignorance of military etiquette, if such a claim was ever permissible for a person who has accepted the duties of Commander in Chief. On September 15, 2014, President Obama is scheduled to bestow two Medals of Honor. Mr. President, please keep your hands to yourself.
