Territorial groups exclude strangers by violating politeness rules rather than force.

Evidence

The indigenous population of the Hangout defended its territory by “bending, abridging and breaking the interaction rules of polite society” (Cavan, 1963 :21). Any stranger entering the bar became the focus of attention, the object of public comment, the butt of repeated jokes. His masculinity was questioned, his female companion (if any) was insulted. While such defensive measures did not completely restrict outsider access (which would not have been tolerated by the owner), it most certainly did succeed in limiting it. Having undergone such an experience on one occasion, many persons probably chose never to return. — Lyn H. Lofland, World of Strangers_ Order and Action in…, 767

Categorization

• XREF: This is the flip side of civil inattention: instead of mutually ignoring, the group weaponizes attention against the stranger to force departure—relevant to Cole’s reading of how detachment and its violation shape the urban observer.
• SEED: Potential essay angle: polite inattention as urban courtesy versus weaponized attention as territorial defense in queer and minority spaces.