This is an entry I posted in another diary which I have closed down. It's the only entry I wanted to save. All the other entries served their purpose and are no longer necessary, therefore have been deleted.

I hope all is well and happy with you folks. I watched a couple movies tonight, Shanghigh Noon and Center Stage. I liked them both, but the Jackie Chan flick was a silly comedy. Good, but not for everyone. I enjoyed it.

Enjoy the pirated entry. The names that are in italics are people who might actually read this diary once in a while. They were in italics on the other diary, and I didn't feel it necessary to change the italicizing for this posting. If you think you are one of the people mentioned, ask me. I'll tell you honestly.

Peace unto thy hearts, folks.

J

I'm quite irritated at the moment. There's an individual with whom I speak every so often. Travis and Erica are good friends with each other. I met Travis through Erica. I have had many conversations with both parties. There are various points of irritation for me involving both of these people seperately. My primary irritation with Erica is her willingness to repeat things I say; of course, she also repeats things from others. Her slight is not a malicious one... I have, however, divulged information which I consider to be sensitive. Most probably, if I stated to her that I didn't want the information shared, she wouldn't share it.

This is the tie in to the main point of this specific entry... There are some very basic difference sin personalities between the three of us. Travis told me today that I was simply not personable. I believe his comment was something akin to "That's okay, I'm personable and you're not." This truly irks me. I believe I am quite personalbe --- Meaning friendly --- However, I am a private person. I do appreciate my space and I do not appreciate having other invade said space. Most generally I do not inface other people's space either. I like my privacy. I do not repeat information told to me by others; simply because it is that other person's choice whether or not to divulge factoids and tidbits. Most generally I do not repeat information unless it is nefarious in nature... and then only to the proper authorities.

I have worked as a receptionist, a position which requires one be personable, more than four years. In such businesses which require one be scruppulessly guarded in regard to stated or overheard information. IE: Client confessions.

In my business dealings I have had access to client records, confessions, and other sensitive information. it has been my responsitility to listen to clients divulge their innermost fears and thoughts. It has been my responsibility to type up reports containing extremely damaging material. I have signed Non-Disclosure statements in many of my jobs. In fact, the places in which I've worked are built in such a way that it would be quite possible for me to be prosecuted for allowing any information to slip through the cracks, whether it is sensitive or not.

Because of all of the above, I have a heightened respect for privacy, personal and business. I also know how to be friendly, carry on a conversation which can get quite lively and still refrain from telling secrets.

Granted, I'm not actually talking about "secrets" per se in regard to both Travis and Erica. I am, however, talking about a concept. Privacy verses friendliness.

I have an accquaintance who works in a position similar to ones I've held for the past five years. She is quite personable. Very friendly. However, she is not a respecter of privacy and she seemingly does not understand - or rather, interpret - non-disclosure. I have heard many tales from her, things which should never have been known by any but client and worker. === This particular situation is in a DSHS office. (Department of Social and Health Services) === The secretary is quite friendly, however, she is telling little secrets and tidbits of information to people who have absolutely no business knowing about what is happening.

As a hypothetical example:

Client enters the building to meet with a worker. The secretary greets them and gets a brief summary of the problem. The Secretary then informs the worker that they have an appointment, etc. Then, later in the evening, the next day, sometimes the next month, the secretary tells a friend or accquaintence that they'd seen said client in the office and said client had a meeting for thus-and-such a purpose.

To many of you, perhaps that seems like I'm making a mountain out of a dust bunny. Regardless, it is imperitive, in the position mentioned above, that the secretary keep her mouth shut, BECAUSE sometimes just mentioning that the specific client was in the DSHS office could taint a future employer/land lord/whatever against said client.

Hell... you might not care. You might think that I were simply bitching to hear myself complain. Not so. Simply read on and be my textual victims for ranting and railing ineffectually.

Being personable is a wonderful trait. Not being loose lipped, however, does not exclude someone from being personable. Being reticent to touch, hug, lick or snuggle with another individual does not make someone non-personable. Therefore, my irritation (which is a non-personable trait) is based on Travis judgement that because I don't like him to hug, touch, lick or snuggle me, I am not personable.

From my particular viewpoint, Travis interpretation of "personable" is an invasion of my personal space. I do not dislike hugs, licks or snuggles, however, I do not openly accept such things when they have not been invited. Atop that, I do not accept the above from people I don't trust.

Travis commented that since our conversation was online, I should "lighten up". I partially conceed the point. I agree that being online one is not limited by the same factors as ware evident in reality. I also believe, however, that when I am not role playing, I behave online as I do in reality. IE: When online, as in reality, I remain quiet unless I have something to say. Most generally that means I do not initiate conversations. Also, I rarely respond to rehetorical questions with more than a nod. Were someone to lecture me, typing a monologue in which said individual rails in my general direction, I listen/read their comments, responding with nods or statements of understanding such as... "I see your point" or "I understand what you're saying."

Were someone to walk up to me in reality (offline) and put their hands on me, or lick my cheek, or any of the other things Travis has done with regularity, there would be one of a few reactions. If I knew the person and considered them to be a close friend, I would chuckle as I took a step back, thus stating with body language that I was not interested in such a close and physical gesture at this point.

If I knew the person but felt they were an accquaintance only, I would step back quickly, smiling, but shaking my head slightly to convey that I definately was not interested in such close contact.

If I knew the person by sight, but did not consider them an accquaintance, or if I simply didn't like them, I would take three or four steps back, stating, "Don't touch me." Thus stating in no uncertain terms by words and actions, that I didn't want any physical contact.

For someone I don't know, the above action includes a glare and most probably a, "Keep your hands to yourself." The meaning of which should be quite evident.

Finally, for someone who is a) drunk, b) leacherous, or c) both, who walks past and a) pats, b) squeezes, c) gooses or d) all of the above, my ass... I would spin away from then, hand in the air, ready to strike them rather hard. I would state, in a low and rather vhement tone of voice, "Do that again and die!"

And, simply for your personal amusement, if you are a friend and try touching, caressing or goosing my ass, you incur my wrath. I don't like it. At all!

If you do it, with the exception of one person in this entire world, I will get extremely non-personable extremely quickly. Do not test me on this.