To not see a problem with *hugs* or one or two kisses at the end of a message?

[HaveIGotPoosForYou]

I have seen a fair few MNetters complaining about offering hugs, hands to hold or putting one or two kisses at the end of a comment being 'unmumsnetty' and 'yuck'. I don't see what is wrong with it.

I can see why it would be weird if someone was commenting on what everyone had for lunch, but most of these are in the relationships, mental health, general health, childbirth etc sections and it seems perfectly natural to me if someone is In pain, grieving or something else traumatic has happened that these things would be offered.

AIBU here?
If so, why?

There is a place for it. If somebody is upset or going through a difficult time then maybe a ((hug)) is OK. I've rarely done it myself but it isn't unknown and I don't like the term 'unmumsnetty either because it suggests we are some gigantic quiche rather than the millions of members that really make up MN so yanbu.

On the other hand, there are some threads where random xx and hugs just mess up the flow of conversation, where they are over the top and unnecessary. Some people, usually newbies it has to be said, put kisses at the end of everything they write. We aren't texting our friends (which is why textspeak is frowned on), we aren't emailing mates, we are having an online typed conversation and too much superfluous kissing and hugging just gets in the way and is cringy. TBH if RL people I didn't know were throwing kisses and hugs around willy nilly I would probably run a mile and so I tend to avoid those sort of posts as being fluffy and Netmumsy

In short, it depends on the context. Context is everything.

The trick is to judge without attacking

And if you think judging spelling & grammar is unMumsnetty, I recommend venturing out of FWR more often

I would hate to be in a gigantic quiche

FWR is, oddly enough, the one place judging spelling and grammar seems to happen a lot - mainly because of our lovely friendly visitors who bring their forum conventions with them and think it's the height of mature debate to pick people up on typos.

I find it particularly helpful when someone is talking about issues like rape or DV and some twit pops up to be officious about spelling.

But that's just me.

You sound upset. Here, have a kiss.

Was that as good for you as it was for me?

LRD I suspect that it is a case of, if you can't attack the point of view with any reasonable argument, revert to the playground and attack the way it is typed. Isn't spelling and grammar sniping the fall back of those who have nothing to say?

I went to a party given by French people recently and had to mwah mwah everyone. It was traumatic

It's easier if you grow with it...

I don't care for unmumsnetty. If I feel a hug is appropriate then I just type it.
You do see it in Relationships and similar forums because sometimes it is called for and the posters do need support.

I don't do many virtual kisses, except for friends.

Hugs and kisses are fine if the situation calls for it. Lovely even.

But the 'sorry hun ((((((hugs))))) xxxxxx' stuff about someone having spilt their coffee or over slept is bollocks

I think it is MN trying to build a protective circle around the endless FB 'gawjuss xxxx lol ((((((hug)))))))' stuff

Yes, it is, big.

I'm just surprised it's seen as a MN thing because my perception has been that MN is actually pretty great about SPAG stuff. I know we have the occasional thread where someone trots out the old 'my son's teacher misspelt something, AIBU to have her shot [and insert minor grammar error of OP's own here]', but in general it's pretty good and I think there's a reasonable understanding of it all.

Textspeak I would have said is more of a MN knee-jerk negative.

Pagwatch - I was just thinking of you, because you are the only person I gave a hug to on MN. In 2008

and
Is that true Cote?

That's rather lovely.

I'm your first. It will always be special

I have had a few dry humps on here but I am not sure they count.

Quite possibly my last, too

5 years already. Time flies when you're having fun.

good grief any twat who notices or worse corrects spelling and grammar of other posters needed their heads flushed down the bog at their secondary school.

what were their friends thinking of?

it's such a 'head girl' saddo swotty twatty thing to do.

The trick is to judge without attacking grin

cheers hunni i will know you are silently judging my awful grammer

awful grammer

and spelling

domino & pmg That would be a bit too intimate for me, too :) Very strange thread, indeed.

lazy Not every post. But if someone has had something horrible happen to them then I think if someone wants to offer a virtual hug I don't see anything wrong with that. It's not like it's at the end of every message 'I had lasagne for tea xxx' 'where are you going today? xxx' it's for a real reason.

LRD It's not sugary, it's being genuine. I guess some people don't get that :(

HaveI - no, honestly, what I'm talking about is being sugary.

I do understand it is possible to say 'hugs hun' or 'love you' or whatever it happens to be, and to be totally genuine. It's usually quite obvious when people on MN mean in genuinely, and I do see that it must feel a bit crap if you say something nice and someone seems to be sneering at it.

But there are quite a few forums where it's the norm to scatter every post with 'hugs' and 'lol' and 'love you hun', and yet also to be extremely unpleasant. Whereas I think one of the good things about MN is that people will say what they think, and usually will try to say it nicely, but they won't use endearments to hide behind.

Honestly, which is more genuinely nice:

'Awww, hun, don't worry your DH cheated on you, I'm sure he loves you really, my lovely DH would never cheat so I feel so sorry for you'

or

'I'm sorry your DH cheated, that is really hurtful'.

I only struggle with 'hun' stuff because I've seen it used in the first way, as a figleaf for people who want to be smug and vacuously nasty, instead of actually sympathizing.

True.

But then what is wrong with:

"I am really sorry that your DH cheated on you. Can't imagine how you're feeling right now. Here if you need someone to talk to though."

or if someone is bereaved saying, "I am here for you, hugs"

Nothing at all wrong with the first one, no.

If someone is bereaved, I think it is a bit odd as a stranger to say 'I am here for you, hugs', but I do see that's a personal judgement. It wouldn't be comforting to me and would feel intrusive.

I do see that may say something about me, I'm just trying to put across why some people do have the response they do to this language.

However, the bigger issue is if someone has a real, difficult problem, and all the responses are 'I am here for you, hugs', that may not actually help as much as someone offering advice, even if that advice isn't easy to hear. I would feel put off asking for any advice on a forum where I knew the responses would all be what I'm calling 'sugary', because I would know it wasn't meant with much depth.

It's to do with the norms that spring up around the language used, not an integral characteristic of those specific endearments.

Hmm, but people post for support as well as advice, LRD. Some situations don't call for action, they're just very hard to bear.

I used to think those sympathy cards saying "thinking of you" were utterly vapid. Then I had a bereavement, and found it strangely comforting that people were bothering to think about me. Since then, I understand threads that consist almost entirely of one-line hand-holding posts. Sometimes it helps to know you're not alone.

Oh, absolutely, garlic.

I don't think it is necessarily vapid, but I'm trying to explain where I think the idea of 'unmumsnetty' hugs comes from.

It's just my perception.

I know. We're all just making the same point, really. It beats working