Creep Shaming?
hyper, I know that this is more than you asked for. But I figured that, since I brought it up, I may as well give all the reasons why I believe it was her complaints about me, and her influence on other people, that got me fired. And the reasons why I believe I was not actually behaving inappropriately.
There was one particular woman at the job who would describe me in various negative ways, including at least one use of the word creep that I heard, because of my tendency to keep to myself. I overheard her talking about me on one occasion, and heard more than once from others that she was doing so.
I know that it was because I kept to myself because, the one time I overheard her, she was saying how creepy it was that I sat by myself at lunch (this was not very long after I'd started there, once I'd been there a while I started getting closer to a few coworkers). And because I literally never interacted with her in any way beyond maybe saying "hi" or "good morning" as we were all arriving at the start of the day (which I stopped doing immediately as soon as I had the slightest inkling that she disliked me).
The reason I believe she had an influence on other coworkers is because I noticed certain people going out of their way to avoid me, most of them people she worked closely with.
The reason I believe I was not actually doing anything inappropriate is because the people who I worked closely with never had any problem with me. Eventually we even started hanging out outside of work. And my direct supervisor liked me enough that, whenever he was away, he chose me to cover for him.
The reason I believe she got me fired is because, when the people from HR sat me down to tell me, the thing that kept coming up was "personality clashes with coworkers."
Unfortunately, I have no case for wrongful dismissal. Pretty much all employment here is considered to be "at will."
DialAForAwesome
Veteran
Joined: 4 Oct 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,189
Location: That place with the thing
I never said the comment that you quote. seaturtleisland said that.
Whoops.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/2ba2d/2ba2d0d49b3935aea5bd1db21a2ec384095e7a2b" alt="Embarassed :oops:"
What I said still stands though. It's depressing.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9f737/9f737eb82a82c7d950391fddd360412a16e4dc70" alt="Crying or Very sad :cry:"
_________________
I don't trust anyone because I'm cynical.
I'm cynical because I don't trust anyone.
It's not the same thing as AS or ASD.
My mistake. I was assuming it was shorthand for Autism SPectrum Disorders.
MDS, your case sounds less like 'creep shaming' than like 'Aspie bullying.' "Creep" is just the word that one bully used in your case, but that doesn't mean that the word itself is bad any more than any other negative descriptor is bad.
Sorry, but I only entered this thread on page 9 in response to a request for data on antisocial tendencies and sex crimes. IMO, creepy as defined as "Behaviours that are indicative of someone who does not see a woman as a whole human being with human rights" is a fluffy normative category, and thus beyond the scope of scientific inquiry.
Oh, and you don't have a monopoly on "correct" use of words.
Ok, you think it's 'fluffy,' and that's fine - but you don't get to monopolize words any more than I do, and I know exactly what I mean, and what most women mean, when they say that a man is 'creepy.'
We've been trying to get you to understand it, but maybe it's just beyond the comprehension of most men.
Nice ad hominem.
Oh, and you don't have privileged access to the minds of other women, either.
Nor have you provided evidence that the "creepy" label has any meaningful correlation to actual harassing, violating or otherwise offensive behaviour.
Sorry, but I only entered this thread on page 9 in response to a request for data on antisocial tendencies and sex crimes. IMO, creepy as defined as "Behaviours that are indicative of someone who does not see a woman as a whole human being with human rights" is a fluffy normative category, and thus beyond the scope of scientific inquiry.
Oh, and you don't have a monopoly on "correct" use of words.
Ok, you think it's 'fluffy,' and that's fine - but you don't get to monopolize words any more than I do, and I know exactly what I mean, and what most women mean, when they say that a man is 'creepy.'
We've been trying to get you to understand it, but maybe it's just beyond the comprehension of most men.
Nice ad hominem.
Oh, and you don't have privileged access to the minds of other women, either.
Nor have you provided evidence that the "creepy" label has any meaningful correlation to actual harassing, violating or otherwise offensive behaviour.
1)Given that nothing I said was reflective of your character, I do not see how that could have been an ad-hominem.
2)Of course not, but in areas where women, in general, take one side and men, in general, take the other side, it's a good hint that the women understand women better and the men understand men better.
3)I have provided plenty of evidence - which I get a strong feeling that no one here bothered to read.
Sorry, but I only entered this thread on page 9 in response to a request for data on antisocial tendencies and sex crimes. IMO, creepy as defined as "Behaviours that are indicative of someone who does not see a woman as a whole human being with human rights" is a fluffy normative category, and thus beyond the scope of scientific inquiry.
Oh, and you don't have a monopoly on "correct" use of words.
Ok, you think it's 'fluffy,' and that's fine - but you don't get to monopolize words any more than I do, and I know exactly what I mean, and what most women mean, when they say that a man is 'creepy.'
We've been trying to get you to understand it, but maybe it's just beyond the comprehension of most men.
Nice ad hominem.
Oh, and you don't have privileged access to the minds of other women, either.
Nor have you provided evidence that the "creepy" label has any meaningful correlation to actual harassing, violating or otherwise offensive behaviour.
1)Given that nothing I said was reflective of your character, I do not see how that could have been an ad-hominem.
2)Of course not, but in areas where women, in general, take one side and men, in general, take the other side, it's a good hint that the women understand women better and the men understand men better.
3)I have provided plenty of evidence - which I get a strong feeling that no one here bothered to read.
1) "We've been trying to get you to understand it, but maybe it's just beyond the comprehension of most men." Thinly veiled accusation that the person you are debating lacks the intellectual capacity to comprehend the subject. Subtle, though, which is why I called it "Nice".
2) No. It is a good hint of partisanship.
3) Where?
Begging your pardon, but that's just not true. I've dealt with the consequences myself. Which have included getting fired from the best job I've ever had, among other problems.
Sorry, but people get canned for not "fitting in" at work all the time. It doesn't just happen to "creepy" men.
I was making factual observations as to what does NOT happen to men who are considered "creepy." Unless you can provide evidence where "creepy" men are charged higher taxes, or put in concentration camps, my statements stand. I fail to see that the consequences of being considered "creepy" are any greater than those stemming from people thinking you're gay, you're the wrong religion, you're smelly, or your personality just plain sucks.
And I've been socially ostracized for being "weird." It's not a male-specific problem.
_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."
-XFG (no longer a moderator)
Maybe being called that is part of the reason for not fitting in?
Do you know what a fact is? As a female are you best placed to comment?
The consequences are much the same as being called a whore for women. Loss of status, respect, fondness etc designed to lower the chances of you breeding and shame them.
Either way, my basic points still stand; that sometimes the word is used for spurious reasons, and that saying that sort of stuff about someone can have real consequences for that person. So maybe people should examine their motives, and whether or not the person has really done anything wrong, before bad mouthing someone.
You very specifically said that there were no consequences for someone labelled as creepy. I was pointing out that there are. No, they do not have to deal with those specific things, but those are hardly the only negative consequences a person might face. And just because other groups may face the same problems does not mean that this group does not face them as well.
This. It could lend weight in other people's eyes to an already-existing prejudice.
Like I say, there is certainly behaviour from men (or women) that deserve the label, and there probably cases where a woman - or man - should say something, but doesn't. That doesn't mean that it's OK to throw around words like that willy-nilly as a way of spreading rumours about someone you just don't like the look of.
You very specifically said that there were no consequences for someone labelled as creepy. I was pointing out that there are. No, they do not have to deal with those specific things, but those are hardly the only negative consequences a person might face. And just because other groups may face the same problems does not mean that this group does not face them as well.
And I'm trying to understand how "creepy" is different from being considered a "jerkwad," a "twerp," a "goon," or any other negative perception a person might suffer from.
Basically, your entire point seems to be that people shouldn't say mean things about each other, which I agree with, but I'm still not getting why "creepy" in particular warrants specific attention.
There are people I've thought of as "creepy," and I'm not overly interested if anyone else would agree with my assessment. If calling someone "creepy" is to be avoided at all costs, even more so than calling someone a "jerkwad," I need an actual reason.
_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."
-XFG (no longer a moderator)
DialAForAwesome
Veteran
Joined: 4 Oct 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,189
Location: That place with the thing
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ed65d/ed65d5eb0537a969241866c52805db3819643f02" alt="Image"
I just wouldn't worry about it. if you know you're not a creep, that's all that matters. Don't let fear of other peoples perceptions make you act weird.
Too bad it doesn't work that way. The word has very real consequences, as has been stated over and over.....and over again.
It's not like if you got called a poophead or something. That blows over. But "creep" doesn't blow over.
_________________
I don't trust anyone because I'm cynical.
I'm cynical because I don't trust anyone.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ed65d/ed65d5eb0537a969241866c52805db3819643f02" alt="Image"
I just wouldn't worry about it. if you know you're not a creep, that's all that matters. Don't let fear of other peoples perceptions make you act weird.
Too bad it doesn't work that way. The word has very real consequences, as has been stated over and over.....and over again.
It's not like if you got called a poophead or something. That blows over. But "creep" doesn't blow over.
Someone who got fired for being a "poophead" would probably disagree.
_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."
-XFG (no longer a moderator)