What I'm mostly reflecting on, though, is why I don't want to engage. An article from a few years back identified one aspect:
Some
people – though not as many as
you might think – consider
"chuggers" to be an infringement on their right to walk down the
street without being accosted. They believe chuggers – or face-to-face street fundraisers, in plain English – guilt-trip people into giving, while
denying donors the opportunity to give to the charities they want to at a time
of their choosing.
… All these "asks" have the potential to make the donor feel
a bit guilty if they choose not to give. But, as any fundraiser will tell you,
if you don't ask, you don't get: people rarely give spontaneously to charity.
Pasted from <http://www.theguardian.com/voluntary-sector-network/2011/sep/08/street-fundraisers-invade-personal-space>
Certainly part of my inner reaction is to the guilt-trip implied: I find myself composing possible justifications, "I already give 10% of my earnings to charities ...". I think that self-justificatory response (never actually said except once when someone came to my door) tells me that I'm feeling that they are making a moral claim on me which I feel that I would be judged negatively -and wrongly- on (and of course I'm projecting that: they may not be judging me at all). That's somewhere in the vicinity of guilt. If the article is right and lots of people don't actually feel that way, then clearly that' mostly my problem. On the other hand though, the article describes by implication a number of avoiding or deflecting tactics that are clearly in common enough use to make me think that a reasonable number of us don't want to engage. In fact some of the discussion leads me to think that a number of people are quite anxious or defensive in brushing off approaches.
I think that the defensiveness could often be about guilt arousal or at least feeling implied judgement. By that latter term I mean that we are being put into the position of appearign to refuse to help sad soulful kittens, or more seriously, hungry or abused children or whatever the charity is concerned with. That is damaging to our self-image if we consider ourselves averagely or better-than-averagely empathic and concerned about relieving suufering.
I found another well expressed couple of paragraphs on the discomfort of avoiding chuuging:
Whilst
I am generally in favour of the concept of charity and I understand charities
need to promote/advertise in order to raise revenue, I have to say I have found
this aggressive on the street promotion quite intimidating and annoying. I
wouldn't have minded perhaps if it was just a one-off event or even a couple of
days but it has been more like two weeks solid now that they've been there. And
I can't get away from it as at the moment I have to go into town three days a
week for hospital appointments. So three days a week I have to walk down these
streets and be faced with up to five people in a row trying to accost me as I
walk by - if the first one doesn't stop you, the next one (5 metres further on)
will be calling out to you, and then the next etc etc etc.
It's
reaching the point where I dread walking down those streets. I hate being
accosted and I hate having to give them an excuse why I can't/don't want to
stop - and some of them are very persistent and even when you say, "Sorry,
I can't stop," they carry on cajoling, saying, "Just for one
minute..." etc. I already make monthly donations to charities that I
choose to support and I kind of resent being made to feel uncomfortable on a
nearly daily basis by charity workers hassling me! I can imagine it must be
even more annoying for people who work in the area and have to go out on those
streets every day to buy lunch etc! I dislike anyone (market researchers,
people trying to sell me things etc) hassling me on the street but when it's
for a charity, it somehow makes you feel guilty for rebuffing their approach!
Pasted
from <http://community.babycentre.co.uk/post/a7173445/wyoo_charity_promoters_on_the_street>
(see some of the responses to the article at the end of this post)
I note the words of response: "intimidating"; "annoying"; "accost"; "dread"; "having to give an excuse"; "cajoling"; "resent"; "uncomfortable"; "hassling". Here the additional thing seems to be about the inconvenience of it. This underlies my own 'busy' responses: I've actually often gone out for particular purposes, I usually have limited time (often I'm going to an appointment or catchin a bus) and not just sauntering around looking for something to do. I think the writer is right about the guilty feeling when it's a charity and I can imagine for some people that on top of inconvenience might give rise to the insulting and offensive responses implied in the Guardian article.
It's not quite the same with ruggers (I just made that up: religious muggers). I note in that last quoted section, that the more general statment which applies to market researchers and sales-pitchers (they don't mention religious propagators but I imagine the same sort of reaction) are disliked for "hassling". I notice that my own inner response to market researchers is less anxious and evokes less self-justification inwardly. Perhaps because I don't see their appraoch as making any claims on me.
So, what about ruggers? I have to admit I've been one in the past. We might argue that it's not asking money from anyone but rather offering a great gift but that's not really how it comes over. In reality most people frame an approach from a rugger in the ame sorts of ways: at beat they might be seen as a market-researcher and quite often, judging from the reactions, ruggers are seen more like chuggers. I think I'd have to argue that on the whole approaching people in this way is not embodying "good news" and because of the largely negative framing of it is in fact counter-productive.
I have a further concern in this respect. If a religious group in a university was doing this, what should be done, if anything? Well, it seems to me that there'd be a right to promote one's views and indeed ones events. On the other hand most policies on harrassment and bullying say, in effect, that there's a prima facie case to answer if someone feels tat they have been harrassed or bullied. Looking back at the reactions I've discovered in the articles quoted above and in my own sel-reflection, I'd say that there is a high risk that if someone wanted to object and claim harrssment, the kinds of words used above would make it seem very likely that they might be judged to have a point. I suspect that the reason that universities have 'no proselytisation' rules and restrictions on leafletting is driven largely by the sometimes fierce dislike of many people to being approached by strangers with an agenda. It's not directly or only a religious matter, it's a matter of neighbourliness
-and that implies a theological evaluation rooted in doing to others as you'd have them do to you ...
Some other responses from <http://community.babycentre.co.uk/post/a7173445/wyoo_charity_promoters_on_the_street>
I don't want to have
to look a person in the eye and justify my skintness, I don't want to have to
lie about why I cant stop and speak
----------------
It is invasive for
people who live and work in the area to be stopped every day when they're just
trying to go for lunch or whatever.
----------------
I hate being hassled
in the street and think it should be outlawed, it's basically intimidation and
bullying yet as long as they have a little badge on saying they have a license
to be on the street they are allowed to do it.
---------------
i tried to carry on
walking but he blocked my path. i said i was in a rush but he said it wouldn't
take long. i let him talk and when he'd finished his spiel i said i couldn't
afford to have another direct debit going out of my account. he said 'not even
for £2 a month?' i said no, and reminded him he'd actually been asking for more
than that. then he looked down at my shopping bags judgingly and said to me
'having a nice shopping spree?' i was livid! i simply said that not that i had
to justify myself to him, but i was shopping for the first time in over a year
and was only doing so because i was pregnant and none of my clothes fitted
anymore. with that i walked off.
