I'd put it this way: I recognise a very distinct difference between social anxiety (nervous and anxious response to being placed in social situations) and a lack of knowledge of social cues, rules and mores. The first is an emotional and psychological response to the experience of being in social situations. The second is a cognitive gap caused by poor socialisation.

Herm. You know, I'm not sure discussing that would be productive. It touches on personal stuff for me. And I consider myself a bit socially awkward, so it'd feel like I was walking through a minefield that could blow up.

So, instead, I'll say I do agree with you on the important part - serial harassers are not people who can't figure out the rules.

Even the worst social klutz can realize "wow, I did X, and so-and-so didn't like it!" The idea that it could just be awkwardness - it doesn't make any sense at all. Once? Sure. A *small number of times*? Maybe. It keeps happening? That's not clumsiness, that's indifference - that's not caring who gets hurt.

I mean - (to make up a completely different example) a klutz might need to learn to ask before hugging.

But a person who keeps hugging without asking, while fully aware that s/he's messed it up in the past? That's not klutziness any more. The *urge* might be klutziness, the lack of an instinctive understanding of body language that says a hug won't be welcome can be klutziness, but people can learn patterns, and can at least figure out that there are rules they don't quite get, and figure out a way to work around them!

Being awkward socially doesn't mean being unable to figure out that people have gotten pissed off or hurt, after all.