Ban on hugs

What is something you can give to family and close friends, yet is banned in increasing numbers of public schools? If you guessed hugs, you really need to stop being such a news geek. Really, MSNBC had a report on increasing numbers of schools in the United States and England banning hugs. The reasons range from sexual harassment to smooth hallway traffic flow. Even so, is this really a good idea?

Think about it. If you use sexual harassment as the criterion for banning hugs, what other sorts of activities could you then conceivably ban? Looking at each other, maintaining a group structure, even walking suspiciously together could be banned because they could all could conceivably lead to sexual harassment. Groups are obviously pressuring people into orgies; looking and walking are all out of the stalkers’ handbook. We definitely need to prevent these activities from occurring by taking draconian measures.

It becomes all the more ludicrous if the parties are consenting. I hug my mother, ergo initiating a form of sexual harassment. I hug my father, obviously leading to even more sexual harassment. I hug my sister, my grandmother, my grandfather, and large numbers of other people with whom I am close. I am obviously a very promiscuous, perverted person, especially since I commit acts of sexual harassment to each of them on a semi-regular basis. I am sure that none of these apply in the hallways of a public school, but the argument that hugs are a form of sexual harassment still applies equally inside and outside schools.

Even if you limit yourself to inside a school to the student population, are hugs really a form of sexual harassment? I can see the argument if the hug was unwanted and there is a history of inappropriate behavior. Outside of a case where there is more evidence of unwanted contact, there is no case for sexual harassment. Obviously, there is more than direct sexual harassment. Essentially, it is harassment due to someone having a significant other and someone else not having a significant other. Someone else is envious that someone has a girlfriend, hence, harassment. It is a means of creating the appearance that all people are equally popular within the confines of a school. This is especially true in Fairfax, Virginia where in addition to banning hugs, they have also banned high-fives. If I have hugged many people, I have high-fived even more. Clearly, high-fives are a “highly sexual activity”.

Even more basic, we look at the argument that people ought to have control over their persons. It is my body; I can do what I wish with it. If I meet someone who wishes to do the same thing as me, the government should have no power to either encourage or prohibit it. This is a weaker argument when applied to minors since they are still under the jurisdiction of their parents, yet, if the parents are indifferent or accepting of the action, then there should be nothing barring the act. Moral authority over consensual acts is not written into the constitution, neither should it be added. In essence, the argument is that the parents give the authority to the schools to provide an education to their children. If the parents give the schools the authority to morally police their children, which includes all forms of physical contact, then let schools ban hugging. But since public schools are barred from imparting any morals apart from prohibiting harming people by forceful, physical act by virtue of their religious nature and can only be charged with providing an education, let schools allow hugging.