What is "creepy"?

Post Reply New Topic

Compliments at work are dangerous. Keep the compliments related to work only. However, if the way someone dresses would make you feel uncomfortable (if you actually cared), consider telling a supervisor.

People being more positively responsive to sexually coded behavior from someone they find attractive isn't really a double standard it's what makes sense. People aren't obligated to like everyone the same.

I know being aware of people's boundaries can be hard with our kind of brain. But it is how to avoid being creepy. They aren't the same for everybody because people don't want the same level of intimacy with everyone they meet.

I don't think swarthy makes sense in this context. I've never noticed dark skinned men (males) being treated better or with less suspicion, if anything the opposite would appear to be true.

What I think they meant was tanned. Swarthy is an odd choice to express that, but it seems to make sense.
Apparently, tanned people are found much more attractive than non-tanned people.

It's Kennedy over Nixon.

Tanned would be fair I guess because it is a beauty standard (since most time in the sun became leisure time)
Swarthy just stood out to me because I don't remember ever seeing it used that way

Apparently last time it came into style in Europe was because coco chanel got sunburnt accidentally.
Until then it was a sign of working on the field/under the sun for too many hours so it was associated with the lower classes.


As for commenting on the physical appearance of someone I try to stick to complimenting the clothing and the other person is left to interpret wether I was actually complimenting the clothing or their figure and people seem to react much better this way.

This kind of woe-is-me, victimhood statement is really not productive.

SOME women may over-react to any behavior that is out of the norm and not be very accepting of people's differences.

But FAR MORE women have already been the victim of sexual aggression and/or violence. I found this out recently after I had a really scary, close call with a very scary, dangerous guy (now going to prison forever-yay!) and I started to talk to women about it. Almost every single woman I spoke with had been victimized in a similar manner. My eyes have been opened...SO THAT IS JUST ONE PART OF THIS.

The other part is that most women are not going to react unless they feel that something is...."out of order" shall we say....

So, you might not have creepy intentions or even BE creepy, but if you are doing something that falls outside the NORM of behavior set by that dominant culture, then there are going to be repercussions. Is that fair? Not necessarily but that's why i keep advocating for Aspies to be REALLY OUT AND OPEN about their sitch and clarify to those around them the behaviors that might be mis-interpreted. Most mature people would be understanding I would think and would even become allies and stick up for you. A LOT of understanding could come out of it. I am envisioning a society someday where everyone is way more educated about Autism and acceptance of different standards of behavior...

that is true and i do not personally care. i just related a relevant "anecdote" to the person who i responded to

i am not at all aware that anyone else thinks like i do, and i am therefore not under the impression that my brain design is even remotely replicated in anyone else's head.

well that is obvious. but my related story was more about potential castigation of ugly people compared to endorsement of good looking people who perform the same actions. it was something i was told and i thought about it and i thought it was sad.
i have no sex drive, and i do not care how attracted i am to anyone because i am not attracted to anyone, and so i am not subjectively involved in this debate.



yes i will have to admit that i incorrectly used the word "swarthy".
i did not look up the official definition of the word before i used it. i have been mistaken for years in my understanding of the word.

i sometimes confuse words of vaguely similar structures, and i think i equated the word "swarthy" (in a way) with "swashbuckling" and "suave", and i had no idea it was related to skin color.

sorry about that.

This is a very interesting question.

Basically being creeped out is a sense of revulsion, often associated with fear.

However it is no indication of actual threat, in fact people can be attracted to riskier propositions.

Two fearful people can make each other feel awkward. I used to have bad social anxiety. I relate to not wanting to be around anxious people. In fact I went to a meetup for such people after making a lot of progress, and there is a definite feeling of treading on eggshells. This is because such people think the worst, it is a very self defeating mindset. Learning to be comfortable with yourself really helps, break free,

However I would prefer to be around introvert neurotic than social neurotic, because that is the very controlling form of general anxiety. Such people tend to project their fears more. I am very independent minded so I have a zero tolerance to it.

Some of my clients have been overt neurotic, I do well to ignore neurotic correspondence directing the focus elsewhere. I had one thank me for 'calming', but the reality is the case of no pandering, and showing by example that it is not reason to get riled. Fortunately this is mostly over email, as in person it is harder, especially thinking on your feet. I know if I pander to tit, it would only encourage them, and increase my stress levels.

Those that are relaxed and confident tend not to creep people out because they come across easy going. For those no born that way, it take continual conditioning, but is possible to do better.

I am not very social because I know well enough to give myself plenty of alone time. That is just how I'm built. However my mental health is pretty good nowadays, because I know how to keep thing under control. I can be more relaxed in the social situations I do engage in. In fact I'm pretty good at the superficial relationships, and have a few close friends.

The paradox is you have to not feel or care about creeping someone out, not to creep someone out. Yes chances are you will creep someone out some time, but bets are on that most people have creeped someone. It is purely a reaction to a situation based on the information available. Don't take it personally it is not a moral judgement. If you really don't to creep people out generally, you really need to stop worrying about it.

You shouldn't worry if a couple of people feel creeped out by you. If it gets to the point it's almost everybody you should sort of look into it though lol

It takes a special kind of mental gymnastics to interpret a situation where women are constantly-terrified of being sexually-assaulted as being somehow dehumanizing toward men.

When I'm out and about by myself, I'm hyper-aware of every person in my surroundings because several times it has proven in my self-interest to do so, and the one time I wasn't, I suffered for it, and narrowly-escaped.

I'm oh so sorry it hurts mens feelings to be thought of as potential predators-
it hurt my feelings when I was picked up from behind and had a knife held to my throat.

I don't think I was being called a potential predator the times I've been called a creep or "creepy",
but if I was, that's fine-
because the consequences for me personally being judged that way are never ever anywhere near as dire as the consequences as someone ignoring their uneasiness about someone when they shouldn't.

I don't really see why the two views here can't be reconciled; there's nothing about them that's mutually incompatible.

It is possible to recognize the fear women face, and at the same time, recognize that for men, it is distressing to be perceived as a monster until proven otherwise. There is nothing contradictory about these things, so it is possible to hold them both with no cognitive dissonance whatsoever.

As far as who we should all be pointing the finger at for the problem, that seems plainly obvious: the predators, and the people who foster the attitudes that cause predatory behaviour. Not women in general, not men in general. Root causes are what is important. Without the predators, and their apologists/minimizers, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. They are entirely at fault, 100%, for the whole problem.

Agreed with that, when s**t hits the fan everyone gets splattered. but i do love how the generalization that all men are rapists/murderers/etc works for you. Ill remember that one to justify whatever generalization comes up ever again

The thing about the "men being creepy" thing is that 1. it's usually cast on men who are NOT creepy (remember Ted Bundy? Opposite example, but women found him debonair and handsome. They were SOOOOOOO wrong....) and 2. in large circles of women that could keep the guy from getting a date or even making friends with women. And the worst part is it's mostly unattractive people that are called that, and not actual creeps.

If the word "creep" would stop having a bastardized meaning, then maybe some down-on-their-luck guys can have a chance.

agreed on the unattractive part. When you look at classic examples of dangerous creeps they have usually been relatively attractive or atleast not falling for the typical "creep" things. This is part of why they are able to do what they do, because between their good looks and psychopathic traits they dont appear creepy.

Ted bundy, Nothing creepy there, ohh wait... 30-36 rapes/murders. Now its creepy. Now consider how he used to get victims by pretending to have a broken arm/leg with a cast and asking for help. Pretty innocent guy asking for help with a broken arm, sounds legit. Hell, just listen to the people that lived and worked with him. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zriSw1UB ... ure=g-vrec
at one point his roomate talks of how there was a serial killer nicknamed ted driving a beetle and they joked it was bundy but never considered it because of his charisma and such. He even worked in a suicide hotline


Jeffrey Dahmer, quite good looking when not nerded up. 17 victims.


The ken and barbie killers, 3 victims including a sister, the guy would only sexually assault them, it was actually the girl that did the hunting and killing (and some sexual assault too)


Susan atkins. Part of the Manson family and convicted murderer.


Richard Ramirez, not a typical prettyboy look but still something plenty of women go for. 14 victims, awaiting the death penalty

... which exactly proves the point that women can't guess which men will be scary in close quarters so they have to be wary of ALL of them and trust their instincts. methinks that is exactly the point that VW was making. not every person gets victimised by those serial killers anyway - many people have a bad feeling about them and never become victims.

some serial killers don't share the Hollywood stereotypical good looks, like:











these "classic examples" of dangerous creeps are not relatively attractive by popular standards.

It's not that the two concerns are incompatible,it's that one outweighs the other so much that it's ludicrous to treat them as equivalent.
As far as being wary or suspicious of men who seem odd (which is subjective), it's not about blaming men, it's about being vigilant.
Women taking steps to feel and be physically safe is more important than occasional hurt feelings.
Doesn't mean the hurt feelings don't exist, just that they don't matter all that much. I have sympathy on an individual level but I'm not going to advocate that women should ignore their intuition to make other people feel good.

Web Page Name
this has probably been seen before