"Creepy" guys

Post Reply New Topic

Or at 58 she's seen it a million times before?

I think that what is a greater problem is that sex actually isn't what I'm after when it comes to women, but rather affection... and as a result, most women want sex more than I do... which is unusual and unsettling to women, hence I'm "creepy" because I'm not "normal"...

THIS for me too. Don't get me wrong... sex is great. I'm a fan. But some things are more important. Affection for one. Having someone to call and talk to when my day sucks. Waking up together in the morning and making breakfast. Sharing common interests. Hanging out. Etc... Those are far important to me than stupid sex.

I definately agree, sex is a pretty mechanical act when you get down to it, and if the right emotions aren't present, it won't be anything more than an act of relieving natural urges. I think this is why marriages often fail, partners who think they're done appreciating eachother (or faked it to begin with) feel disillusioned when they realize that sex isn't the best thing in the world.

I think the issue here is that someone is assuming that Dantac is proficient at cyberstalking as opposed to proficient at researching stuff in general. According to that line of reasoning, if a self defense instructor warns someone to avoid poorly lit isolated areas at night, they're doing so because they're someone who has experience with victimizing people in poorly lit, isolated areas at night, as opposed to them doing so because they're concerned about the well being of someone else.

On the other hand, it could be the case that people who demonstrate what's seen as cyberstalking are more likely to be good at cyberstalking through practice as opposed to being good at cyberstalking because they're good at researching things in general, so I can't really say whether or not assuming a pessimistic view is justified, but w/o more information about the person it can certainly be inaccurate.

I think she's given the best explanation in this thread personally. What has age got to do with it? I doubt much about 'creepy guys' has changed over the generations apart from the terminology. Read a few modern classics and you'll see that nothing really changes with human relationships.

And women never send out mixed signals that can be misread by guys? Esp. guys with AS that have a hard time reading people in the first place? In my experence even after I tell the women I am interested in to be straght forward and say what you mean, don't say one thing and do another, ect.. The women still does it.

That pessimistic view can certainly be innacurrate, but it is most likely erring on the side of caution- better safe than sorry. If people only were cautious or nervous if they had 100% reliable confirmation that they were in danger, the human race qwouldn't have lasted this long. One of the things that keeps people (a lot of animals, actually) alive is the ability to be cautious in the face of possible danger rather than only in the face of confirmed danger. Even though the poster is not a cyberstalker, the woman was right to be cautious. I would be very wary of somebody who showed that much proficiency at cyberstalking unless I had prior knowledge that would let me know he was just researching.

In your example of the self defense instructor, the people in his class have paid him to instruct them in safety. That constitutes prior knowledge that the person is on the up-and-up. A mere acquaintance who demonstrated the many ways to attack somebody at night would be very suspicious. In order for the poster to be analogous to the self defense instructor, he would have to be a computer safety instructor. Such people are now sometimes hired to give seminars in highschools to teach naive teens how to avoid online predators. Somebody who has been hired for that express purpose doesn't trigger alarms. They are a professional and therefore research it (like the self defense instructor). Somebody who...just knows...is creepy unless he gives an indicator that he researches computer safety rather than cyberstalks people.

In general the "creep" label will always stick harder on us guys because we are considered the stronger sex and the most potential sex offenders even though woman are very much guilty of the same actions and behaviors.

So you're saying that all women should modify their behaviour just in case they happen to meet an aspie guy which is something that has very long odds of happening in the first place? Every eligible woman or girl should take it upon themselves to be informed of every one of our little quirks and foibles? Then your saying that once they've finally managed that and have found their way to you they should discard an entire lifetime of learning so you can be happy. You don't ask for much do you? I'm just kidding with you but that's the impression I get from a lot of posts here. Personally I think it's easier to accept the negative things about other people and modify certain aspects of my behaviour to get what I want or need as the opposite just so unlikely to happen it's not worth thinking about.

Rorschach is creepy.

I'm saying that after I tell someone that I have a hard time reading people and try not to give mixed signals to me then its on them. Its a matter of learning how to deal with different people. Just as I have to learn to deal with other peoples little quirks. Once they tell me about them. Its on me to remember. When they keep sending me mixed signals after they know about me. Then it means they don't respect me and then they are not worth having as a friend.

Or you are young and do not understand these things yet.

Still not that easy, It's almost sounds like you expect them to stop the mixed signal thing within minutes or even hours of you telling them. That's unrealistic, you haven't been able to learn enough to read the messages after a lifetime, they can't turn off a lifetime of habits and instincts like a switch. Many of these mixed signals they don't realize themselves that they're sending. Maybe they're confused themselves on their feelings. Mixed feelings = mixed messages? It's not like NT people are going around perfectly understanding each other in some special code that we haven't been given. They're confused, frustrated and clueless often enough as well.

True, but that label disappears with more experience or exposure to other people (they understand you more). On the flipside, women who actively experience other people have a different stereotype that threatens her reputation. A shy attractive female might not have a creep stereotype, but she has to deal with the "slut" stereotype whenever she encounters men (even if nothing happens). Coming full circle, I've noticed nice guys who thought less of women after they watch their reputations go down for experiencing the world. The problem here is frustration and dissemination of information, it's just a part of being human.

My understanding that I have these days of it - being creepy just means that your failure at the art of superficial conformity at some level; ie. you don't dress, pick your music, choose your friends, etc. as a fashion to fit an agenda, you don't keep up with the latest trends, you may even be 3/4 of the way there but lets say where whatever you think looks good but then pick more esoteric music - because you like it rather than because it'll fit you with the crowd or the girl you want - or you pick books, or movies, or pass time sports, etc. - because you want to and because you like it.

I'm not saying that there aren't people authentically being themselves to the best of their abilities and conforming wondrously - if its what's in their heart its what's in their heart and there's nothing to be judged negatively about that. The way I still see it though, not all, I really hope not most, but the women who tend to at least hold more emotional and judgemental dialog out there for the guys to see - seem to operate on that very superficial sort of level; if he doesn't look right, if he wears a brand X shirt but a brand Y pair of pants, if he listens to music B instead of music A - all of these things really matter. Please don't misunderstand me, I think there are enough guys who fit a bad stereotype to even the score quite well; no special diss on women, seems like each gender though has its own brand of antipathy for the other which is, IMO, the genome and natural selection forcing us to be more animalistic and basic - if not at work, with friendships, family, etc. it at least has almost everyone nailed down at some level on this. That unfortunately keeps many attractive women in a somewhat uneasy peace with unattractive guys who aren't showing that intent and many attractive guys in an uneasy peace with unattractive women - at least until they know the other person has all interest pushed out of their head.