Learning Behavioral Patterns, From the View of Private I

Impressions and Being You
Each person has their own individual identity. We have all learned how to respond to situations, and despite different upbringings, there is a general consensus by the population of what is considered acceptable behavior. Knowing how to respond using proper etiquette in any setting helps create a good impression of yourself, shows maturity of age, and knowledge of human respectfulness.

The impression you leave may be compromised if others are intent on damaging your reputation. With advances in technology, the ability to view anyone remotely is accessible to almost anyone. Remote applications which are easily available, provide the ability to view and speak overhead to someone anywhere, despite any privacy laws. As this becomes more popular, a person’s good image is nearly impossible to preserve. While it may be natural to present yourself at your best while in public, there are many situations where a person does not wish to be viewed or have their life publicized. Several examples of this might include using the restroom, bathing, romance or other interactions with others. Everyone deserves privacy in their own life. Without question there are moments of privacy that no one would want watched or analyzed.

No Kidding, Children Too
Children likewise should be immune to remote viewing. While it may seem to be the ideal way to monitor a child by having a virtual babysitter spying overhead, it teaches the child that this is the norm. A child who is raised with stalkers overhead, learns to communicate with them, and generally learns to welcome them into their environment. It would seem that this would be on radar for Child Protective Services and fall into the exploitation of children category, even if parents give access. There truly is no way to control what is being viewed by the remote viewer. Psychologically it is similar to a child having imaginary friends, except they do not make them up, the remote viewer really exists. The spies overhead have the ability to order the child, view the child live, zoom, and even x-ray them. The child learns a different approach as an alternative to healthy interactions and real friendships. The child learns that every area of their life is subjected to being watched, even if no one is there, without boundaries, as way of life. They do not question that it is an acceptable way to communicate and interact.

Spying Risks All Around
For the Victim: Along with viewing, spies who use these remote applications on a regular basis, are able to notate behavioral patterns and unique styles of the victim they are watching. This detracts from the value each person has. Just as a company might be spied on to gather trade secrets, a person who is watched has their attributes stolen from them making them unmarketable. The victim feels their soul stripped as those things which compose their person are publicly viewed and shared. Much like automated artificial intelligence programs, spies are able to gather information on the way the individual lives their life as well as their schedule to predict next behaviors. Learning behaviors and patterns of a person can result in identity theft, stealing the personality and information about the victim and putting them at risk.

Further security concerns include not being able to escape remote viewers. People who use remote viewing methods can access anyone, any place, even outside, at any time of the day or night. Environments such as a car, an office, or a house offer no place to escape. Even outside, the victim can be watched real-time on trails in parks, in tents, in parking lots, and even in swimming pools underwater. For unwilling parties who do not want to be viewed, there is no escape. Having real-time audio access, the remote viewers also have the ability to speak live. There is no escape from their abuse constantly overhead, other than to block their comments by wearing headphones, which is unreasonable to wear all day and night.

For the Viewer: Beyond the affects that remote viewing has on the victim, it also affects the viewer who loses perception of the difference between watching a movie on screen and watching a personal life. Remote viewing quickly deteriorates the potential any human relationship might have by eroding trust. Besides creating a psychologically abusive environment that they cannot escape from, there are several other problems which arise from remote viewing that devalue human life and can potentially lead to addiction.

Threats Remote Viewing Causes:

1. Detracts from Human Worth. The first reason remote viewing is detrimental is it detracts from human worth. The appreciation of fully enjoying the personality and all the traits of another person is lost. Viewing becomes merely a form of entertainment. The problem is this entertainment quickly manifests to mockery, shunning, and comparison to others. It easily becomes a way to filter out any positives about a person, who has become nothing more than a detached, animated object on a screen. The spy begins to accentuate what they see and perceive as negatives.

2. Steals and Duplicates Personal Attributes. A second reason remote spying is a negative, is that there is a tendency to notice attributes or talents which the person excels at, to steal and duplicate. Any positive features are added to the spy’s personal portfolio or used to share with others to improve theirs. No longer are these attributes the selling points of the victim, but public knowledge. Instead of generating new talents or processes, they rely on duplicating what another does, to improve upon themselves. It would be better for the parties involved to freely share their own trade secrets from their own personal portfolios. Ripping off another’s personality, interests, way of speaking or behaving is not admirable. If these features were shared by the individual to another person it would be acceptable. If it was a celebrity who was admired for a trait, and it became a fad, this would be acceptable as well. However, those who spy on people to steal information rob another of what they may excel in. This is not to say that behaviors or traits are exclusive to each person. It is the way these attributes are shared which determines whether it is an offense. The maliciousness of those who spy often do this for their own self-improvement, to gather information to ‘help others’, for popularity, or to earn money. Regardless, it is for the downfall of the one they are spying upon.

3. Security Issue and Identity Theft. The third reason remote viewing should be resisted, is that monitoring and learning someone’s behaviors causes a security issue and identity theft. If a spy notates over time the intricacies of a person’s day or schedule, this can put the victim at risk. Noticing details such as how often a person does something, how they go about it, when, and why they make decisions, will give those who spy the ability to forecast next behaviors. They will predict in advance what they will do, where they will go, how they will interact, how they will react, as well as their bodily functions and reactions. While this type of micro-monitoring is suitable perhaps for a baby, this is not acceptable at all from adult-to-adult without permission. In fact it reflects the immaturity of these adults who consume their time monitoring the life of another, rather than improve upon their own life. There is no reason for the victim being viewed to even exist as all is known and any uniqueness duplicated.

4. Quelches Zeal for Life. Finally, remote viewing quelches the victim’s zeal for life. With all being stolen, and no privacy given, the victim feels violated by the second, unable to generate new energy and frozen with exploring and creating new material, because every second is known, seen and critiqued. The spy uses remote viewing to gain control and power over the victim in a world they cannot escape from. The spy pierces the victim’s creative and loving human soul to mold a generic spirit of nothingness. The victim becomes no more than an object, like an experimental rat, a thing to manipulate being subjected to conditions. Joy and zeal found in life is dampered if not made void entirely. The motivated spirit to take on new efforts and enthusiasm for new adventures is lacking because all is seen, and surprises or things prepared for are already revealed.

5. Addiction. Similar to temptations which have the ability to form into addictions, it is evident, there are several phases to the use of the remote application. The first phase is usually human inquisitiveness. A person is easily convinced of the idea of how enticing it would be to view another person’s life, hiding behind the screen of a remote device. The second phase of remote viewing is scrutiny. The spy begins to seek out oddities, errors, and flaws in the other person. The third phase of remote viewing is mockery. From these perceived discrepancies, the spy becomes disenchanted with the person and may even share negative attributes with others. Somewhere between phase 1 and 3 there is guilt associated with their actions. If the spy comes across the victim in public, there is usually a feeling of anger toward the victim or avoidance because of their spying. The fourth phase of remote viewing, which can happen at any stage, is addiction and dedication to the device. The pretend relationship psychologically becomes an actual relationship to the viewer. The fifth phase of remote viewing is fulfilling sexual needs fostered by the viewing the victim’s life. They may go to the extent of finding them in person and raping them, molesting them, or zooming in on sexual parts. Monetarily, it opens the door for a business of selling views to others for the same reason of inquisitiveness and entertainment. The human worth is dissolved to nothing but an object of entertainment.

The Psychosocial Impact
This poses the question, why people wouldn’t want to enjoy others but choose to spy on them instead. As a form of psychological abuse, those using remote viewing seem to possess social dysfunctional developmental issues. Many who currently are using remote viewing are between the ages of 35-70, well past the age range for when social maturity would be expected. An influential American psychologist, Erik Erikson, studied the development of humans in a social context. Taking a look at Erikson’s study with relation to remote spying proves psychosocial development is lacking in these users of remote viewing applications. While as adults they most likely have knowledge of how to interact with others in a healthy manner, their approach is contorted and damaging to good psychosocial skills interacting with others and in their own maturity.

Is this behavior evident of social immaturity for these adults or is this a contorted response to already learned psychosocial skills which they are using knowingly as a form of abuse? When a distortion to natural processes exists, there usually is crime, addiction, or disability. With full knowledge of what they are doing, this behavior is both immaturity, criminal, and can easily lead to addiction. These criminal-addicts are confused with their identity and lack confidence of interacting in a healthy manner with other people. They are confused and insecure about themselves much as pre-teens might be in their developmental stage of learning about themselves and how to interact within the world they live within. While this is not acceptable at any age, by the time a person is middle age or older, their psychosocial developmental stage should already be at an advanced stage of maturity.

Erikson’s Psychosocial Developmental Study
Erikson in his study of psychosocial development determined there are 8 stages which exist during the lifespan of a human from the time of birth through old age. The stages include Trust vs. Mistrust, Autonomy vs. Shame and Doubt, Initiative vs.Guilt, Industry vs. Inferiority, Identity vs. Role Confusion, Intimacy vs. Isolation, Generativity vs. Stagnation, and Integrity vs. Despair. These stages describe the process a person goes through to reach adulthood, by learning how to interact with others and develop their personal identity, over the course of their life. Taking a closer look at the stages of this study can help understand developmental issues in the individuals who are addicted to using remote viewing and analyze where in these stages their maturity is lacking.

Trust vs. Mistrust – Infancy stage. Erikson sets this as the first stage of a person’s individual stage of development which occurs from birth through 18 months. Within this time, a person learns to trust others and learns that the world is a safe place. Rather than adding to a person’s safe environment, the spy creates mistrust in an individual’s life. Invading upon an individual’s personal boundaries, the spy uses remote viewing develops mistrust in a person who already understands trust and healthy interactions between people. They use this mistrust as a foundation to prevent relationships from forming and to crumble existing relationships. Friends, family, significant others, employers or anyone else who uses remote viewing to watch another person, immediately begins to cause mistrust to the relationship or potential relationship. Viewing another remotely watching their personal life without permission is a form of dishonesty, stealing, violation, and deception. In this first stage, the relationship is already disintegrating once the remote device is first used. If permission is granted by the party being watched, trust would still exist because boundaries would be respected. Since the spy is not given permission by the individual, it is a violation and creates distrust.

Autonomy vs. Shame and Doubt – Early Childhood stage. In this stage, Erikson explains children who are 2-3 years old are developing a greater sense of self-control. As it relates to remote viewing, the spy does the exact opposite striving to destroy the self-control of the victim. Their ultimate desire is to obtain control and power over the person they are watching. They monitor all actions throughout the day to the very minute detail. Details are shared as concerns with others. They discuss any observation with others as if it were a group of parents watching a child needing to make decisions for them even in the smallest matter. Everyday decisions and actions by the victim are observed and are even verbally ordered by the person spying. Examples of this may be telling the victim what clothes to wear, what to eat, instructing personal routines and habits, critiquing weight, finding anything to nit-pick at and cutdown. In their desire to acquire all knowledge, they seek any opportunity to create shame and shame the person to others. It may not even be shameful activity which they shame. The spy understands shame as a means of power over the person they watch. There is no realization or importance of independence and responsibility of the adult. The spy seeks to try to destroy trust, confidence, the independence in the adult victim to gain a sense of power over the person.

Initiative vs. Guilt – Ages 3-5. The third stage in Erikson’s stages of development is where children learn the difference between good and bad, how to interact socially with others, the ability to make decisions, and how to lead others. Using remote viewing, the spy seeks to destroy initiative in the person they spy upon. The try to cause a sense of guilt in the victim by chiding any actions they disagree with. They break down self-motivation and confidence. They create a significant amount of limitations for what the victim can do discouraging any initiatives and effort. Doors are closed on any attempts to find a way out of a seemingly blocked situation telling the victim they are worthless.

Industry vs. Inferiority – Ages 6-11. In this stage, children learn the value of work, realize their successes and achievements, and their failures. They develop a sense of self-confidence. Using a remote means to view, the spy communicates to the victim all the many flaws they see, that they are an outcast, and that they do not belong in society. Whatever they look like, who they are as a person, their work, and whatever they do is seen as inferior. The spy then communicates the person’s perceived personal failures and inadequate work ability to sway the views of the community, which results in blocking the individually socially and professionally. The victim is painted as an outcast possessing no capabilities to contribute to society in any way whether personally, through relationships with others, volunteer work, paid work, or any initiatives. They are without a doubt categorized as an outcast and treated as such.

Identity vs. Role Confusion – Ages 12-18. In the 5th stage of ego development according to Erikson, a person establishes their personal identity and how they fit into society. The spy redefines the identity of the association of adult-to adult to superior-over-dysfunctional. It might be better understood as adult-over-child, although the person being watched is fully mature, responsible, able to function and is not a child. The spy seeks control and power and does not recognize the victim as fully independent or capable as a human. The victim, in the spy’s opinion, does not fit into society.

Intimacy vs. Isolation – Age 19-40. In this stage, the person learns how to have intimate relationships with others and establish their life together with others away from absolute loneliness and isolation. In this stage, humans grow in closeness, honesty, and trust with another. Using the remote device, the spy redefines relationships and intimacy by what they see on screen, much like being engrossed in a movie. They see the device as a true social interaction. The relationship to them exists while the person being viewed may not have even met the person spying or have any interaction with those who spy. What the spy views without permission, they use for the fulfillment of a need for a human relationship and personal sexual gratification. For most, this becomes an addiction, devoid of the human person’s presence.  A fake relationship develops in their mind, and so advances in realness, that the person is inclined to not think twice of progressing further with crimes of rape and molestation, fulfilling their desires, still not knowing the person nor having permission. They keep the victim in isolation, unable to meet other people. They discourage verbally overhead any other solicitations of acquaintances to the victim. If not swayed from association, new acquaintances are given remote viewing access to ensure discouraging further association. The remote viewing is the only relationship that exists as the victim is unwillingly watched by many people.

Generativity vs. Stagnation – Age 40-65. In this middle adulthood stage, there is a desire to contribute to the world and be involved with the community and society. Using the remote device, live views are sold out to create a community of more spies to watch the person’s personal life. Recorded views, and real-time view spots, are sold for additional money to feed curiosity, addictions, and mockery. While generating more video footage to sell to others, the spy thrives on building their own personal popularity to the community with what they sell. At the same time, they stagnate the life of the victim socially by turning their life and any nudity into an exploited show to watch and monetize. Work is also stagnated for the victim with any contribution to society whether paid, volunteer, initiative to the good of others terminated. The victim’s work and efforts are discouraged, blocked, and anti-promoted. Propaganda spread to the community leads to further isolation and stagnation for the victim deeming them indefinitely unwanted by society and unwelcome. Any effort for them to succeed or be incorporated into society is truncated.

Integrity vs. Despair – Age 65 to death. In this final stage, an individual reflects on whether their life was meaningful or if they have regrets over the life they’ve lived. They have a sense of fulfillment or despair. Those who use the remote device cause years to be lost, a sense of disparity, lack of dignity and worth, and detachment of the individual from society. The individual’s life only exists for the purpose of being exploited. The person they spy on is to them nothing but a waste of human life, and not just to them, but to all they speak of the person to. There is no future where one is watched 24/7 in a psychologically abusive environment, nor in one that extends to the community at large. Work and personal growth are controlled. This ability extends insomuch as to control life entirely with complete restrictions other than existence. Although the victim attempts many ways to achieve successes and progress despite a restrictive and monitored environment, the efforts are for naught, and as a result despair is likely to occur.

Moral Implications of Remote Viewing
Remote viewing affects the normal and healthy, psychosocial existence of an individual transforming their environment into one of abuse. Using the remote viewing affects human relationships while also affecting the life of an individual to make the private life of the individual public, disregarding their human dignity, and ultimately wasting the individuals worth and life. Rather than build up human worth in others and foster healthy human relationships, they seek to destroy morale and worth. They are satisfied only by the image on a screen, using it to the ruin of the victim as well as themselves. Beyond Erikson’s findings or any other behavioral model by other renowned psychologists, these spies do not follow the moral model of the universal teachings of religions which believe in the value of human dignity and worth, and goodwill for others. These people seek to destroy others and the joy they should experience in everyday life interacting with others. They tear at an individual’s unique worth of existence, ability to create, ability to contribute to society, and their reserved private space needed to nourish their spirit and person. In all essence the people using the remote device pretend to be God and destroy the God in other people by mutilating human dignity. 

Any religion would agree that a human should not seek to attain equality to God. It would also be agreed upon that human dignity and worth should be given to all people. Furthermore, robbing and stealing is not part of following any moral law either. We are not meant to be watched. Only God has absolute knowledge of every detail of our life. Any human who strives to do this is morally breaking the commandment of being in competition with God, attracted to the desire of having all knowledge, all control, and all power over a human. God gives humans freedom, whereas the spy who in many ways acts as God with God-like access, restricts freedom. God gives worth and human value, whereas the spy tears down an individual. As people we are called to be in community with each other, working together, loving each other, and building up each other. The spy strives to pull a person out of the community, subject them to isolation, and breeds hate and contempt from the population. God gives each person unique gifts and attributes to share with others, whereas the spy steals attributes and tries to create a society where all have the same attributes, or one where the more affluent can have all attributes of any person, while the victim is stripped of all attributes they have. Besides being highly offensive and destructive to the individual, the spy is morally being offensive and destructive to God and His Creation.

Remote viewing undermines human relationships and the human dignity of life. If permission is not granted, a person should not be watched. Behavioral patterns, personal attributes and abilities are unique to each individual which should be appreciated and treasured, rather than stripped behind a device that redefines the person as an object of entertainment to be scorned and annihilated. Humans need personal space to be able to function naturally and interact with others. Privacy is necessary for creativity, for motivation, to put forth our ability, to have a healthy degree of self-confidence and independency as an adult, to grow as individuals, to heal, to be intimate with others, to be genuine, to be loving people, to have joy in life, and ultimately to survive.

Read more…Shop these products on Amazon!

The Stages of Psychosocial Development According to Erik H. Erikson
by Stephanie Scheck 

Patterns of Behavior:
Konrad Lorenz, Niko Tinbergen, and the Founding of Ethology

by Richard W. Burkhardt Jr.

Learning Cognitive-behavior Therapy: An Illustrated Guide
(Core Competencies in Psychotherapy)

by Dr Jesse H Wright MD PhD (Author), Gregory K Brown (Author),
Michael E Thase M D (Author), Monica Ramirez Basco PH D (Author), 
Glen O Gabbard (Editor)

Handbook of Surveillance Technologies: History & Applications
by J.K. Petersen (Author)

by George Orwell

Return to article postings

Rape Part II: Stealing Someone’s Life

We think of rape as a sexual and physical act of non-consent. Can this word also be used to describe the non-physical violation of stealing someone’s life by spying, eavesdropping, sending dreams to inquire answers to probing questions, learning behaviors to master them, and having the goal of gaining absolute knowledge of every aspect of an individual without their consent? If a person is a criminal, and is under investigation by the FBI, there might be some leeway for this type of intrusive activity—with the goal to stop crime for the safety of others. For the average person however, doing this, is a way to rape a person’s life devaluing their human existence and worth.

Seeing Each Life as a Gift with Consent to Share
Each person is given the gift of life. We all have our individual paths and stories. Not all of this is to be shared as public knowledge. A movie called The Circle, is a very good example of what technology has the ability to do, to access anyone’s life at any time. There are benefits to the convenience and power of being able to know anything about anyone at anytime, but doing this desensitizes the value of human existence stripping us down to objects rather than a person. Some rather know all facts and intricate details about a person and then publicize these, rather than experience the beauty of the human spirit which is to be found in knowing an individual and the gift of revealing ourselves to others and sharing our uniqueness with others personally.

“To be part of someone’s life is a beautiful gift. To take the liberty of overstepping boundaries to partake in someone’s life without permission is another form of rape.”

There is a gift in the joy of sharing our stories and experiences to others ourselves. Part of being human is to also have the right to privacy and discretion in what we share. We allow people to have access to certain areas of our lives and withhold other areas to remain private. Our need for privacy stems from wanting to preserve our dignity. Another reason is that trust must be earned before certain people earn the right to know information. Other areas, which may be guarded the most, may be reserved only for self with our personal thoughts, relationship with God, intentions, and dreams. We set boundaries for our privacy when it comes to those areas which require more confidentiality. These areas are not for public knowledge. They may be with about financial information, information about our relationships, our deepest thoughts, desires, or creative ideas we have. There is an inner area of ourselves that should have the right to be withheld from other people who may want to pry. It is in this area where we develop ourselves. In fact, there probably is an entire psychology around this very topic. When what we value as private information is viewed without our permission, we are violated. When our behaviors and unique qualities are learned and duplicated by others, or our ideas and creativity are accessed before we share them, it no longer is our individually which is enjoyed and we are stripped. Instead of admiring what we contribute, the intent is to clone and cheapen what value we bring to the world. It is devaluing to what we contribute to the world. It can be devastating because it is what we are made of, our personality, our talents, our stories, our mannerisms, or anything else of our existence.

The Human Relationship is What Is Seen
The human relationship must be put first. Individuals who turn to remote devices to access other people’s lives remotely to spy and eavesdrop without permission are building habits of destruction. Using this application, they seek to learn everything about another person by watching them, accessing them without permission. Unconsciously they place themselves as more important than the other person, taking the liberty to view them, meanwhile trampling over dignity and human respect, and accessing what is not their right to access. In all essence, it is the infinite quest for knowledge they seek to acquire, which has been tantalizing to humans since the Garden of Eden. To have god-like access, almost equal to God himself, is magical. It is a way to “enter” into the life of another. Some people even become so addicted to this that it becomes the relationship. Just like a new-found porn, or entertainment TV show, the viewer can see into someone else’s life to be with them, silently viewing, or speaking real-time in a one-way conversation to the victim. To the victim, it is highway robbery of their life, and even their soul. Everything that composites the human life from eating, to dressing, going to the bathroom, what is written, created, experimented, and anything that nourishes individuality, and interactions with other humans is all accessible. All secrets are revealed, even if they aren’t secrets. All methods are learned. Learning and sharing these with others, the victim feels their soul as it is ripped and shredded. Not a second is private. It destroys new creativity to be watched. New creativity, which has always been protected by inventors or artists with trademarks for fear of being stolen, is all void. The rapists see new ideas and creativity the moment it is developed, even before it is close to being publicized and they publish it to others with this knowledge they obtain, even before it is fully-created, as if it is their right. Their right, as they see it, is to be all-knowing and all-deserving to be god-like. They use this information to build their popularity for the destruction of the victim. All experiments, new experiences, or anything which develops the person, are also violated. It stunts these creative moments—and who wants to try things as much when someone else is right overhead to view and steal the moment of inception. Joy and inspiration are severely quelched to a dull moment of pain, and withheld instead. The same happens with human relationships as they are overheard, viewed, and participated in as if it were an interactive sitcom. These relationships, no matter what kind, cannot stand a chance with 3rd parties witnessing them and intruding upon them. The addiction to trespassing on the life of another is one which devalues the human existence and multiplies with a plethora of consequences.

In all essence, being viewed, your life is no longer your own to experience and live. A person has to wonder why these intruders do not value their own life, spending time living it to its potential with all the experiences life has to offer, rather than spending their life viewing the life of another person. Secondly, you have to wonder why these offenders do not value the dignity and respect of human existence, instead overstepping these obvious boundaries, to invade upon another person’s life to destruct it. Stealing someone’s life is a form of rape. While it may not be sexual, the holistic experience is violated and damaged.

“When you touch someone’s life it is a privilege. When you touch someone’s heart it is a blessing. When you touch someone’s mind it is an honor. When you touch someone’s soul it is a triumph. When you touch someone’s spirit it is a miracle.”

—Clean Up Dallas with Culture and Kindness

Information Privacy Law (Aspen Casebook) 6th Edition
by Daniel J. Solove (Author), Paul M. Schwartz (Author)

Protection of Information and the Right to Privacy – A New Equilibrium? (Law, Governance and Technology Series (17)) 2014th Edition
by Luciano Floridi

The Circle
Starring: Emma Watson, Tom Hanks, John Boyega

Try Amazon Prime 30-Day Free Trial Offer. Sign Up Now!
The membership program offers special benefits including:
* Instantly watch thousands of movies and TV episodes
* Borrow Kindle books
* Get unlimited FREE two-day shipping (no minimum order size)

Return to article postings



The Pertinence of Privacy and Permission

Boundaries we set for ourselves set a line between areas which we are comfortable allowing others to access and areas of no-entry where our self-worth and dignity are tread upon. Without boundaries, people can easily take advantage of us and cross into areas which would harm us or cause offense. It is healthy to have boundaries set. It defines the person and helps others find it easier to be more respectful.

Without realizing it, boundaries exist with expectations we have. Unless these are clearly stated, it is likely these boundaries will be breached because each individual’s definition of what is permissible is completely different. Usually, it is when these are crossed, and we are offended, that we finally state what our expectations are. It may take having these boundaries crossed by others before we even know how to define them. Likewise, it may take having boundaries crossed to learn to redefine our limits we have and adjust them.

For those who already have a good idea of their own personal boundaries, vocalizing these helps clarify them to others. The most common areas we have boundaries for are:

  • Affection/Sexual (unwanted touches, sexual molestation, rape, sexual boundaries, boundaries of relationships with those outside of relationships, acceptability within relationships)
  • Dignity/Self-respect/Worth (verbal statements, actions of disrespect, public humiliation, disowning, belittling, slander, stripping of clothes, comparing to shun, insulting mental, physical, or intellectual ability, insulting physical features, degrading, stating incapability or unworthiness)
  • Financial (discussing financial information, addressing wealth or poverty, discussing paycheck or salary information, worth of property)
  • Beliefs (religious beliefs, political beliefs, sexual beliefs, ceremonies, or opinions especially which one feels strongly about, respecting the practices of religions and ceremonies)
  • Sensitive subjects (anything which might not be openly discussed or the party is hesitant to talk about, personal matters, family matters, etc)
  • Property (cars, electronics, houses, assets, or what a person does not have)
  • Knowledge of personal information (relationship, medical, personal, social, private information, hygiene, showering, bathroom and toileting, weight, anything sexual related, habits, addictions, struggles)
  • Respect to elders or leaders (parents, senior level family members, managers, political or religious office)
  • Respect to party and minors (adjusting the nature of conversation for the parties intended of any age level, determining what is appropriate for minors, and children of certain age levels)
  • Spying and Eavesdropping (eavesdropping and snooping on someone’s life, spying, using a remote application to view another person’s life, reading other’s correspondence or accounts written or electronic, gathering information of any kind without permission by witnessing, reading, or listening)
  • Failures and successes (losses, relationship breakups or divorce, miscarriages, addictions, bankruptcy, foreclosures, job loss, successful gains especially which put a person at an advantage over others)
  • Associations (associations of any kind for the sake of gossip, wealthy associations, less fortunate, mixed racial, or those which may be controversial)
  • What we share being shared to others (sharing information you were given to others)
  • Generosity (charitable givers may want to remain anonymous)
  • How we are spoken to by others (speaking respectfully to others)
  • Intangibles we value (beliefs, values, ethics, love for God, love for others, family bonds, friendships, reasons for why, rapport, business acumen, attitude, your process, reason for thoughtfulness, ability to lead, separating business and personal)

Boundaries are limits. It is a stopping point which must be observed or else an offense is committed as the person trespassing crosses into an area which is off limits without permission to access.

The more prominent the individual, the easier it is to acknowledge their boundaries, because of their position and for an individual’s own benefit or recognition. For the rest of those in society, we consciously make a decision to respect other people’s boundaries because we value them and find them important simply because of their human existence. Respecting boundaries is a way to give dignity and self-worth to the person. If these are crossed by accident, then an apology is due, as the offender makes haste to return back to what is acceptable either acknowledging that the boundary was crossed, or to ask for permission for an exception to be made. This is good etiquette.

In an idealistic society there would not be any boundaries at all. For the free-spirited person, this is an enchanting idea. However, this utopia can only exist if basic respect is practiced by all, in a society of clones. As unique individuals we all approach “free-will” differently. Some are more conservative, while others will live more liberally. With different life experiences, each person has different boundaries. The common ground can only be found in respecting these boundaries to give worth to the person’s human existence as a unique creation that deserves respect.

—Clean Up Dallas with Culture and Kindness

This month’s topic “May I”, addresses the importance of boundaries and asking permission in everyday life situations, dating, when borrowing property, observing others, and the effects when boundaries are tread upon. Boundaries and privacy are important! Good etiquette asks “May I” and respects others!

Follow Clean Up Dallas with Culture and Kindness on Facebook and LinkedIn and @cultureofkind on Twitter, Pinterest, and YouTube.

Learn more… Search for these on Amazon! 

Boundaries Updated and Expanded Edition:
When to Say Yes, How to Say No To Take Control of Your Life

by Henry Cloud and John Townsend

A Young Woman’s Guide to Setting Boundaries:
Six Steps to Help Teens *Make Smart Choices *Cope with Stress *
Untangle Mixed-Up Emotions

by Allison Bottke

Invasion of Privacy: How to Protect Yourself in the Digital Age
by Michael Hyatt

Privacy in the Age of Big Data:
Recognizing Threats,  Defending Your Rights, and Protecting Your Family
by Theresa Payton

Saving Face: How to Preserve Dignity and Build Trust
by Maya Hu-Chan

The Circle
Starring: Emma Watson, Tom Hanks, John Boyega

Return to article postings