Good Morning!

[TychaBrahe]

It has been said here that if you feel intimidated then not responding to the stranger greeting you is understandable, but it is rude in principal to not respond to a friendly greeting.

The reason I do not respond relates to 2 instances I experienced.  In the first, the man who said hi, and then excused himself to get past me to the greeting cards, initiated a conversation with me.  I was responding to his questions until I realized that he was using the opportunity to masturbate  and was attempting to stand ever closer so that he could rub up against me.

The second instance was the absolutely adorable child who was trying to speak to me, and was (it turned out) the distraction for the adult who was attempt to steal my purse.

Yes, I live in a not very nice neighborhood, but I have adopted t fairly cool stance when greeted by strangers.  I may nod in a very nondescript manner, which is an acknowledgement that I heard the greeting, but it also makes it clear that I have no wish to go further. 

Or the person who greets you like a long lost friend (and I have a terrible memory for faces, so it very well could be) and then asks you for money.

(Seriously, I met my stepfather's first wife in the arcade downstairs.  Apparently she was working in the building.  I'd seen her just the week before at my stepbrother's wife's birthday party. I still didn't recognize her.)

[wolfie]

I can't cut and paste from the Miss Manners article, but it seems like she is saying the person who says "good morning" to someone who they don't know is being rude.

[Surianne]

So then, I need to ask (for clarification, because there's a disconnect that I'm truly not getting):

You're saying if the phone rings, it's rude not to answer it, even if you don't recognize the number?  If the doorbell rings (or someone knocks), and you don't recognize them, you have to answer?  Because that has been stated time and time again to not be the case, and there seemed to be a unanimous consensus.  Was I wrong, or have things changed?

I don't care about the unaninmous consensus that you see (which I don't see).  I'm allowed to have my own opinion--that's what I enjoy about the boards, reading everyone's personal take on the situation. 

I don't see these issues as similar in the slightest.  On the phone or at the door, no one sees you look them in the face and ignore them.  That example simply isn't relevant to me.

I do think it's rude to flat out ignore someone who has said "Good morning" or "Hello" to you, with the following exceptions:

1) not hearing them or realizing they're talking to you
2) safety (including if you think they're hitting on you--that fits into safety for me)
3) the person is interrupting you (if you're on a cell, for example)

[Diane AKA Traska]

I'm going to use a specific example... which has always been upheld to be true here.

If I'm at home, and a neighbor comes to visit, and they ring the doorbell/knock, it has been stated that I am under no obligation to answer it if I do not choose to, and I am not rude to not choose to.  That they can see me through the window is irrelevant.  That they know I heard them is irrelevant.  That I looked directly at them through the window and made eye contact is irrelevant.  As it's been repeatedly posited, just because I am greeted by invitation to interact (by knocking or doorbell), I am under absolutely no obligation to respond in kind.  (If I'm misrepresenting this claim, I'd like to know... because I've read this time and time again.)

If that example above is rude, then it flies in the face of every unexpected-visitor-at-the-door thread I've ever read here.  If that above example is not rude, then I don't see how being unexpectedly greeted on the street and not responding is.

I know that example isn't relevant to you, but the only difference is that in the first example, you're sitting on your couch, and in the second you're out and about.  That's too slight a difference for me to be able to completely separate them.

An invitation to interact is an invitation to interact, whether it's a ringing phone, a knocking door, or a cheery "Good morning!" from someone I wouldn't know from Adam.  My being outside of my house gives me no special obligation to consent to conversation, beyond that which I am either literally obligated to (if I worked retail, I'd have to talk to customers), or that I choose to.  Not everyone is a social butterfly.  Some leave the house purely to go from point A to point B.

That said, I *do* sometimes accept interaction, and respond in kind.  But I do so by choice, not because it's the only polite choice available to me.

[Surianne]

Traska, I have no problem with you disagreeing with me, but really, not everyone on every thread is going to agree.  So when you say, again, "But I read this thread and everyone said ____ so you have to agree!" I just don't care.  That thread isn't gospel.  I don't have to agree with it just because other people in the thread did.  "It's been stated time and time again--"  So?  I'm sure there were also dissenters in that thread who disagreed. 

So, here we go: yes, I think that if your neighbour comes over and knocks on your door, and you lock eyes through the window, turn around, and don't open the door, I think that's very rude and dismissive.  If you mouth "Sorry" or acknowledge in some other way that you can't open the door right now, that's difference.  But just...ignoring a human being after looking at them, when they've done nothing wrong to you?  I can't do it, and I can't agree with it. 

[Mahdoumi]

I can't cut and paste from the Miss Manners article, but it seems like she is saying the person who says "good morning" to someone who they don't know is being rude.

Then, please post the link.

[Surianne]

I can't cut and paste from the Miss Manners article, but it seems like she is saying the person who says "good morning" to someone who they don't know is being rude.

Then, please post the link.

I'd like to see it too, please--this would really be surprising!

[Mahdoumi]

I'm going to use a specific example... which has always been upheld to be true here.

If I'm at home, and a neighbor comes to visit, and they ring the doorbell/knock, it has been stated that I am under no obligation to answer it if I do not choose to, and I am not rude to not choose to.  That they can see me through the window is irrelevant.  That they know I heard them is irrelevant.  That I looked directly at them through the window and made eye contact is irrelevant.    I don't recall that ever being supported here.  As it's been repeatedly posited, just because I am greeted by invitation to interact (by knocking or doorbell), I am under absolutely no obligation to respond in kind.  (If I'm misrepresenting this claim, I'd like to know... because I've read this time and time again.)  You are under no obligation to answer the door or the telephone, the assumption being that the other person has no idea whether you're home or not.  Gazing through the window and locking eyes with someone and then not answering the door is incredibly rude (unless it's a safety issue.

If that example above is rude, then it flies in the face of every unexpected-visitor-at-the-door thread I've ever read here.  If that above example is not rude, then I don't see how being unexpectedly greeted on the street and not responding is.

I know that example isn't relevant to you, but the only difference is that in the first example, you're sitting on your couch, and in the second you're out and about.  That's too slight a difference for me to be able to completely separate them.  There is no "slight difference" when in your second example, the person is completely aware that you are ignoring him/her.

An invitation to interact is an invitation to interact, whether it's a ringing phone, a knocking door, or a cheery "Good morning!" from someone I wouldn't know from Adam.  My being outside of my house gives me no special obligation to consent to conversation, beyond that which I am either literally obligated to (if I worked retail, I'd have to talk to customers), or that I choose to.  Not everyone is a social butterfly.  Clearly . . .   Some leave the house purely to go from point A to point B.

That said, I *do* sometimes accept interaction, and respond in kind.  But I do so by choice, not because it's the only polite choice available to me.

[Surianne]

Mahdoumi, I think you just explained my feelings better than I did!    Yes, for me, the rudeness comes with looking at someone, having them see you, and making a conscious decision to ignore them.  It's so...dismissive and demeaning, to me. 

[wolfie]

It's the same one Computer Geek posted. I will type out the sentence I am talking about:

"It is merely a proper response to the rudeness of approaching a stranger - you - in the first place"

The last paragraph of the link to the woman who is being approached by the young men. That a cut is refusing to acknowledge someone you actually know that she is refusing to get to know anyone under those circumstances.

To me those two links mean that not saying good morning to someone you know would be rude but ignoring a stranger is not and if you really want to analyze the situation the person saying good morning could be considered rude for approaching someone they did not know would welcome their interaction.

[Mahdoumi]

Wolfie, I understand how you interpreted that, but would you consider that you've pulled one sentence out of the context of an entire explanation, which may have changed its meaning?  The woman was writing about being approached in order to be harrassed, not because the parties were merely wishing her a good day.

[Diane AKA Traska]

Okay, that's all I was asking.  There seemed to be a disconnect where I was referring to previous threads and you thought I meant this thread.  Now that we're on the same page, I can accept us being on different paragraphs.  =)

I can't agree with your reasoning, of course, and you can't agree with mine.  But it's good to know I'm communicating effectively... I actually wasn't sure until now.

Also (this to Mahdouni)... how odd.  I know I've read several times in previous threads that one is never, ever obligated to answer a front door, no matter the circumstances.  But a quick search can't seem to find that, so I apologize for putting forth something that I thought was discussed but apparently wasn't.

[wolfie]

Wolfie, I understand how you interpreted that, but would you consider that you've pulled one sentence out of the context of an entire explanation, which may have changed its meaning?  The woman was writing about being approached in order to be harrassed, not because the parties were merely wishing her a good day.

Not really. I see the last paragraph as having nothing to do with why you are being approached but that not wanting to start a rel@tionship - even a minimal one of saying good day - with someone you don't know is not rude.

It's interesting to put this thread next to the one in the "silence" folder - the grumpy man one - where majority opinion is that you don't need to talk to people you don't know even if you are reasonably sure you are going to be seeing them at a regular basis in the future (in that case a class)

Edited to add - I just reread the question and she did ask how she can discourage the people harassing her while not being rude to people being friendly. Miss Manners didn't distinguish that the ignoring response is rude to the people being friendly.

[wolfie]

Okay, that's all I was asking.  There seemed to be a disconnect where I was referring to previous threads and you thought I meant this thread.  Now that we're on the same page, I can accept us being on different paragraphs.  =)

I can't agree with your reasoning, of course, and you can't agree with mine.  But it's good to know I'm communicating effectively... I actually wasn't sure until now.

Also (this to Mahdouni)... how odd.  I know I've read several times in previous threads that one is never, ever obligated to answer a front door, no matter the circumstances.  But a quick search can't seem to find that, so I apologize for putting forth something that I thought was discussed but apparently wasn't.

I remember that too, but can't find a thread referring to it. But I would say that while you are never obligated to answer a door if the person on the other end can see you and is someone you want to keep a relationship with it would probably be a good idea to open it - even if all you say is "I'm sorry this is a really bad time! Can you come back later?"

[Surianne]

Yes, I was interpreting that as about a woman who was being hit on, not someone greeting her with a genuine "good morning".  Was that the context?  

If so, I think that's totally different. Most of us pro-greetings folks have included "safety" as a big, big exception, and getting hit on fits in with that.  

I would never, ever expect someone to acknowledge a person who was setting off their creep radar.  

Okay, that's all I was asking.  There seemed to be a disconnect where I was referring to previous threads and you thought I meant this thread.  Now that we're on the same page, I can accept us being on different paragraphs.  =)

Ahhh, I gotcha!  Yes, I think we were all confuddled there for a bit    I haven't read the other thread (or don't remember it, at least).  I have to no problem with agreeing to disagree, though!

(I also feel like I should put an asterisk on my posts saying *raised in a small town.  Because the regionality thing mentioned earlier really is true.  

Barely-relevant story: I lived in Toronto for a year, and I remember complaining to a friend (a city girl) that I kept getting hit on, and it was so bizarre because that never happens to me and I wasn't even dressed nicely.  We went for a walk downtown together once, and after about 10 minutes she turned and said to me, "Of COURSE you're getting hit on!  You keep SMILING at people!")