33
The Importance Of Hugging
Why do some cultures seem abnormally prone to revel in
violence?
One possible answer comes from the patriarch of American
psychology, William James.  Says James,  civilized life makes it possible
"for large numbers of people to pass from the cradle to grave without
ever having had a pang of genuine fear."  James implies that without
the omnipresent sense that at any moment they may lose their lives,
the beneficiaries of civilization feel far less of the savage animosity, the
fierce hatreds, and the deep desires to mutilate and kill that terror
inspires.97  James' notion is intriguing.  But let's not forget that we, too,
have our hatreds and our violent moments.
Another answer may be found in a survey of 49 primitive
cultures conducted by James W. Prescott, founder of the National
Institute of Child Health and Human Development's Developmental
Biology Program.  Some of the cultures Prescott studied took great
pleasure in "killing, torturing or mutilating the enemy."  Others did
not.  What was the difference?  Says Prescott, "Physical
affection--touching, holding, and carrying."  The societies that hugged
their kids were relatively peaceful.  The cultures that treated their
children coldly produced brutal adults.  Or, to put it more technically,
a low score on the "Infant Physical Affection" scale correlated with a
high rate of "adult physical violence."98
You can see elements of Prescott's "Infant Physical Affection"
factor at work in Islamic society.  Islamic mothers tend to be warm and
nurturing.  But Islamic fathers treat their children harshly.  They are
cold, distant and wrathful.  Their justification is an old religious
proverb: "father's anger is part of God's anger."99  When he reaches
puberty, an Arab boy is expelled from the loving world of his mother
and sisters into the realm of men.100  There, hand holding between
males is still allowed, but physical affection between men and women
is frowned upon.  A vengeful masculinity stands in its place. The
<<  <  GO  >  >>