OP here. Thanks for all your thoughts on this. Large majority against me! Definitely most of you think IABVU. Makes me think.
Just help me out here a bit, if you can be bothered. Leave aside 'force majeur', as it were - different things apply, obviously, if I fall down in the street or something, or if I need a paramedic to help me in or out of an ambulance ... circumstances alter cases, and in such occasions (I can think of lots), I'd be positively glad to be touched by a stranger. But, as I say, leaving aside such cases, in general I think I - just on account of being a human being - have the right to not be touched by arbitrary strangers.
Not the biggest deal, sure. Lots of worse things happen. But suppose someone ruffled my hair, saying, ' There's a lovely old GP!' I'd be put out. (I recall my mother, bless her, looking at me hard when someone took on themselves the right to do that when she was disabled and couldn't speak at the end of her life. Well meant, it was; but she hated it. It detracted from what little autonomy she had left. I'm sure you'll all see that; hope so, anyway.)
So, if you agree (of course you may not), that I have this right as an adult not to be touched by strangers, and that my DM also did, here's my question. In what decade of our lives do we gain this right? Children don't have all the rights adults do. That's to/for their benefit. And some rights are achieved gradually, not necessarily overnight, as it were. But, in rough terms, when (and why, of course I'm interested in) do we start having the right? Any suggestions from the (majority of) touchy-feelies?
Sorry a bit long. Sorry also I don't have time to reply personally to everyone. Many thought-provoking comments (along with the usual stupid abuse, got to say, never mind that). Please accept my thanks generally for offering your thoughts.
But just one more thing. I was struck by the number of comments about different cultures. I've lived in many different cultures myself. Touching-related ... I do recall lots of parents asking me, on lots of different occasions, way back, if their children could touch my skin, as they'd never seen one of my coloured-skin before. That was in a very different culture (and quite a long time ago). Of course I always gave permission; and you couldn't get more of a 'strange' in 'stranger' than that. But my autonomy living in that culture was always respected. I do also recall returning from there and feeling how impolite people in Europe were, by contrast! Many cultural differences, indeed (and not just north and south Europe).
Maybe that's a whole different matter. But, well, rights are rights is what I think. And what might be categorised as a 'cultural difference' can still be rights-infringing, no? (I've learned not to give examples of this sort of thing on MN as some readers become unable to follow an argument once there's an example there that takes over their thoughts, IYKWIM. You can surely think of some yourself.)
In short, I'm still not convinced. I think my DGC's autonomy involves a right not to be touched by random strangers, notwithstanding how well-meaning said strangers are, or whatever cultural practices surround touching children. (With the obvious caveat above about force majeure.) I don't like random hair-fluffing now I'm (what I insist on still calling) an OAP ... my old DM never did either ... nor does my DGC. I can keep you away myself, more or less; but my DM couldn't and neither can my DGC; so I sometimes had/have to stick up for their (otherwise impotent) wishes for autonomy. How U is that? And yes, if I'm right and it is U, this has consequences elsewhere for friendliness and acceptable expressive beaviour. 'Rights' considerations often do make for hard choices like this, we're all used to that I hope. But, well, autonomy is very important to us as people - children too, I reckon. There you go, enough from me for now.