I think you are correct. I’ll add that what is unattractive or creepy to one person (trousers down under the ass, loud juvenile music blasting completely distorted from a beater car with wheels worth more than the car, chewing and spitting tobacco, getting huge ear piercings that leave holes you could throw a chihuahua through in your lobes) can be attractive and alluring to another. So, it’s all subjective.
This:
is the unwarranted assumption to which I was referring.
I really hope and pray that I don’t meet a woman like that (again) in the dating world. Hating someone immediately for no reason? That’s not pheromones, the evidence on its power is pretty shaky. It’s more likely just being very picky and indecisive. At worst, being unstable, spoiled and princess-like.
ad hominems are weak sauze… What’s next my spelling ?
Jeez, why is it so difficult for some people to admit that nearly everyone is at least partially susceptible to good looks, and that people will take more shit from an attractive person than an ugly one? It’s human nature, nothing to apologise for. Everybody does it.
Chemistry is full of bullshit anyway. A good deal of the time when someone gives you a lot of ‘chemistry’ that is a sign they are triggering some unhealthy dysfunctions inside of you that haven’t been worked on yet.
[QUOTE=Doctor_Why_Bother]
Jeez, why is it so difficult for some people to admit that nearly everyone is at least partially susceptible to good looks, and that people will take more shit from an attractive person than an ugly one? It’s human nature, nothing to apologise for. Everybody does it.
[/QUOTE]
It’s Chinatown.
Mmm, yes, how brave of you, but no one is saying looks don’t matter. What some are saying is creepiness is not a matter of looks. Do you get the distinction, or shall we summarize yet again?
Yes, and those two statements are mutually exclusive.. Look, 'Creepy ’ is a value judgement, but it’s vague. It can mean, among other things:
1). This guy is making me feel uncomfortable.
2). This guy is making me feel threatened.
3). This guy just isn’t taking the hint.
4). This guy, while not making me feel uncomfortable or threatened, is weird.
So two guys come up to you in a bar, one after the other. One looks like Johnny Depp, the other looks like Johnny Vegas. Both of them are behaving in a way which, after some consideration, you judge to be “creepy”. The fact is, if it takes you one single solitary nanosecond longer to convict the Depp-a-like of “Creepiness” than the Vegas-a-like, then you simply must conclude that “creepiness” is, to some extent, a function of looks. Either bad looks accentuate it or good looks mask it, but it’s a function of looks one way or the other. It may just be that unusually good looks may temporarily blind you to a guy’s creepiness, even if it’s only for a minute or two, but that still means looks are a factor.
Frankly, all your “summarizing” just comes across as an attempt to deny the bleeding obvious.
And, of course, if a guy’s looks are good enough a girl may well decide that, creepy or not, she’s gonna take him home and fuck him anyway. Ugly guy? Not so much.
All this is absolutely fine, of course, and is just simple human nature. We’re all “guilty” of judging by appearances, so there’s no need to rationalise it away. In the dating game, as in virtually every other area of life good looking people can sometimes get away with things that plain looking people can’t. That’s just life. My advice? Get some hobbies, take up a good cause, climb Everest, just do anything to avoid becoming the kind of God-awful fucking loser whose self-worth is completely tied up in what the opposite sex think of him/her.
Let’s look at three types of behavior
[ol]
[li]Creepiness level 0 (e.g. “Hi”)[/li][li]Creepiness level 5 (e.g. “Can I sit next to you while you wait for your friend?”)[/li][li]Creepiness level 10 (e.g. He takes it out)[/li][/ol]
Almost no one will think that the first type of behavior is creepy, and almost no one will think that the last type of behavior is non-creepy, irrespective of the attractiveness of the guy.
But, what some people are claiming in this thread is that the second type of behavior, which is more in the gray area, will be more likely to be categorized as creepy if the guy is not attractive and non-creepy if the guy is attractive.
Not sure if this claim is indeed true, but based on some responses in this thread, there may be a hint of truth to it.
It may be or may not be consciously disingenuous, but it comes across as such.
When someone hears of a 50 year old going after a 25 year old, people should not first have to ask “Is the 50 year old as hot as Clooney?” before they can respond with “Eeewe, that’s creepy” or “That’s nice for him”.
If the determining factor is the hotness of the guy, then why not state that as the reason for saying “Eeewe, that’s creepy” vs “That’s nice for him”, instead of stating that age is a factor in the creepiness of the guy?
Nope.
Some women may be more willing to put up with creepy behavior when it comes from an attractive guy, but creepiness is creepiness, no matter who it comes from.
It’s case by case, you know. This guy was handsome, but also creepy as fuck. Behavior is a bigger factor than you acknowledge.
Yep. And that “grey area” is not really a grey area. Did she already indicate to him that she wanted to be left alone? If yes, then he’s creepy, because he’s decided her boundaries are not as important as his desires. If no, she then has the opportunity to say yes or no, which, if he respects her answer, makes him non-creepy; and if he doesn’t makes him creepy.
This is not hard. Read the Doctor NerdLove link. Read about the “soft no” and body language. Read about how the guy in the example pretty much said he understood her answer, he just didn’t like it so he was pushing on anyway. People like to claim cluelessness or “she’d be into it if I were hot,” but seriously, seriously, ignoring issues of consent is never sexy. Even if you’re a fucking Adonis. It’s just not that hard.
Pretending to be clueless is just an attempt to shift responsibility for your actions from yourself to your target. A transparent one at that. That’s not sexy either.
I find this rather silly. What does a “function of looks” mean? I would also treat a ‘creepy’ experience differently based on a lot of factors. A guy my own age making a pass at me isn’t creepy. Doing so at work could be slightly creepy. It becomes creepier if the guy is my boss. Does that mean that creepiness is a “function of position”? Lots of factors, like age, familiarity, situation, environment, etc. affect what is going to be considered as creepy.
In any case, in my opinion, where better-looking people get less ‘creepy’ accusations is that they have fewer opportunities to be creepy, not that the same behavior is less creepy. As several posters have pointed out, the most common reasons people are seen as creepy is being doggedly persistent in the face of rejection, not respecting boundaries, not respecting non-verbal “no” signals, and other violations of social expectation when it comes to courting someone. If someone’s more attractive, they’re going to get fewer rejections (non-verbal or otherwise), so they have fewer opportunities to act inappropriately in the face of rejection. If they’re getting the go-ahead, then it’s a different story as to what’s appropriate.
Nonetheless, “model sexy” guy who gets a nonverbal ‘go ahead’ signal and who then careens right clumsily towards his target’s genitalia immediately, or asks “So, do you like it in the butt?” as a first question, is going to be fucking creepy to the vast majority of women. I don’t care who he looks like. Yeah, I’m sure you can find exceptions of situations where this might be OK, but in general terms, it’s not socially acceptable and thus ‘creepy’.
Kaio is exactly right. Creepy is largely about handling consent and boundaries appropriately. If the word creepy upsets you, replace it with ‘makes me uncomfortable’. Unattractive guys don’t make me uncomfortable – guys who ignore signals, and act strangely, do.
I’m saying that behavior is 100%. I’m not sure how it can be higher than that. I was just raising the issue that the OP used the word “look” to refer to creepiness, and that that incongruency is unhelpful if what we’re trying to do is reinforce the concept that creepiness has to do with behavior and not looks.
It means physical appearance resides somewhere in the creepy determination, which is intertwined with a lot of other variables you’ve listed. It’s then more complicated because that “creepy” determination has any number of meanings and interpretations. I think there is little doubt people associate previously experienced or perceived behaviors with certain appearances, but when this happens often enough, people skip the behavior part and we arrive at the basis for prejudice. In your unattractive person example, we can speculate that unattractive people have to navigate a given social interaction differently, in order to make up for the initial impression gap an attractive person enjoys. Some people are put off by an unattractive and “persistent” person, due to their interpretation and tolerance for them and their approach. In another example, it isn’t abnormal for a member of one gender to walk into a room full of the other, only to initially feel uncomfortable-- it doesn’t have to stop at gender, it can be any number of independent or combined physical traits, another being skin color.
As an anecdotal example, I’ve been out with friends who’ve asked me to stick close while walking/standing, because someone looked creepy. In the moment, they made part of that determination based on physical appearance, while trying to read behavior for confirmation (it’s anyone’s guess how accurate their read was or what personal biases influenced it). It’s also common for the setting and environment to have direct influence in this particular case, which we both agree on.
Though it’s not always ideal, I consider this within the realm of normal behavior, at least until it starts to override otherwise rational ideas and perceptions, but that’s for each individual to decide. Behavior is most definitely a critical factor and I’d argue that it’s likely among the strongest/backbone, provided you have the key component of time. However, we don’t always have or care to afford the luxury of time, when faced with a given situation. Thus, I think claiming physical appearance has no bearing is splitting hairs to find a distinction, so as not to appear superficial, when it’s more realistic to acknowledge its place. That said, superficial people exist, and aside from them, we very often attach attributes/appearances to previous behaviors as a shortcut. The degree to which we do this can either be socially acceptable or not and it’s always changing.
Unless the creepy person in question was unconscious, there’s no way that you could isolate a ‘creepy’ determination from their behavior. It’s not like it takes a long time to notice things like staring or leering, or various “off” behaviors that could indicate all kinds of things like substance use or mental problems. And even then, a great deal of potentially creepy parts of appearance are highly controllable (e.g. bathing, grooming, socially appropriate and well-kept attire).
It’s also potentially possibly that your friends are overly sensitive. If you’re immutably ugly or deformed in some way, but you’re wearing a nice suit, you’re acting normally, you’re friendly without being “too” friendly, I doubt that most women would call you creepy, but undoubtedly some portion might as shorthand for “someone I would never be attracted to” rather than “someone who makes me uncomfortable or is potentially threatening”.
Well, for the record, I don’t literally think human pheromones are the cause. It was a joke meant to highlight that there really do seem to be a passel of definable and indefinable, conscious and unconscious factors that can add up to a pretty quick, and sometimes pretty definitive feeling of connection or distaste for a person.
Calling me “picky . . . unstable, spoiled and princess-like” merely for disliking someone I happened to meet indicates to me that you have some underlying assumption that women somehow owe random men they meet a chance at winning their approval. And that is (wait for it) creepy!
Your assertion that instantly and totally disliking someone is “indecisive” is just amusing.