Comment author: [deleted] 29 April 2013 10:32:08PM *  12 points [-]

Right. What do I mean by "subhuman"? It's probably a bad word to use.

Besides my wife, most of the value I get out of other people is intellectual. Sharing interesting ideas, working together on cool projects, pair programming, etc. I can do these things with the occasional interesting female, and it works for a while, but then it inevitably slides towards flirting and the subtle sexual dance. My thoughts turn towards sex, I start acting differently, sitting close, talking and making jokes, steering things towards sexual escalation, and so on. This is mostly uncontrollable; the meat does as it was programmed to. This ends up distracting from the real reason I might want to be friends with this person; they were intellectually interesting. (This has happened at least five times.)

So why "subhuman"? I've gotten pretty good at noticing the social game and the behavior protocols. People act a lot differently depending on attraction and the gender match; with men and women there's that flirty sexual undertone. It looks a lot like a dog sniffing another dog's butt and then executing different behaviors depending on the result; subconscious, nonsentient, animal behavior.

I think I should be able to treat women as people instead of just automatically executing this absurd mating dance to the detriment of my plans and interests. It's really frustruating to have the meat override me on this, and it makes me feel subhuman (have you read "Dune"? That kind of "subhuman").

So I'm not just oversensitive to political correctness or a rapist monster, I just resent that flirting has root access to my motivations and interferes with my friendships.

Of course the sexual dance is a fun and valuable part of being human, like eating, sleeping, and playing, but I have bigger plans right now and I resent that those things aren't optional.

In response to comment by [deleted] on LW Women Entries- Creepiness
Comment author: jooyous 30 April 2013 08:21:15PM 4 points [-]

What about interesting women that clearly aren't available or most likely don't find you attractive?

Comment author: OrphanWilde 30 April 2013 07:16:18PM 3 points [-]

While rephrasing it as the matriarchy is deeply amusing to me, I don't think we're even talking about some deliberate system here. I think most women just have no idea how to date women, and give men advice on how they interact with women, which is to say, behave like a friend.

Pity lesbians have been fetishized. Men could use lesbian friends.

Comment author: jooyous 30 April 2013 07:26:36PM *  0 points [-]

I think women actually give men advice by telling them how they'd like to ... be dated? At least, that's what I do. Which makes me think army1987's mother probably wanted a hypergentlemanly man to lavish her with niceness and gifts and attention. Actually, maybe she was experiencing a shortage of gifts and attention from someone she DID have romantic feelings for, and so didn't realize what an overabundance of gifts and attention would feel like from someone she had NO romantic feelings for, which is generally when Nice Guys™ become problematic.

Maybe we need to ask the opposite question. Mens! How would you like to ... be dated?

EDIT: I think it was a system back in the day when land and inheritance and dowries were important and some memes from back then are still alive and floating around confusing everyone.

Comment author: [deleted] 30 April 2013 06:32:49PM 3 points [-]

And don't get me started with the advice about women my mother would give me: it sounds exactly like you took everything people complain of about Nice Guys™ and told me to do exactly that. Fortunately it has always been obvious to my System 2 that it's not enough for me to romantically like a woman but she has to romantically like me too, but my mother nearly convinced my System 1 otherwise.

In response to comment by [deleted] on LW Women Entries- Creepiness
Comment author: jooyous 30 April 2013 07:07:08PM *  4 points [-]

That's exactly why these gender relation things are so insidious! They don't come from evil mens oppressing womens because they want to cause suffering and inequality or evil womens calling mens creepy and taking away all their status. They're cached thoughts that well-meaning mothers and grandmothers pass down to us because they think they're helping us survive in a cruel and confusing system. Without stopping to think that we can slowly dismantle the system to make it suck less.

Comment author: [deleted] 30 April 2013 04:43:34PM 3 points [-]

Yes, people offering me their sympathy when someone wrongs me even when I've pointed out that I'm not terribly bothered myself seems to be a common pattern.

(Seems like my resent-o-meter is under-sensitive; in game-theoretical terms, it's like when someone makes me an excessively small offer in the Ultimatum game, my System 1 infers that they're not an agent and decides that I might just as well do the CDTical thing and accept the offer anyway.)

In response to comment by [deleted] on LW Women Entries- Creepiness
Comment author: jooyous 30 April 2013 05:39:36PM *  0 points [-]

Now that you mention it, I've only ever used this tactic on people I didn't know very well, so I expected their resent-o-meter to be average. And then I could use their reaction to gauge their actual resentment-setting. Meanwhile, I have a friend with a resent-o-meter that's perhaps higher than necessary, and I always go with the "Well you CAN'T just hate people for something like that ..." which led to really long, tedious debates about why she shouldn't demonize some gentleman or another. But I think she finds reasons to resent people because it's the only way she knows to deal with sad things. :(

Comment author: buybuydandavis 30 April 2013 04:04:13PM 3 points [-]

This goes back to the ever expansive use of the word "creepy".

I take it a little back to the roots of moving slowly along the ground. In terms of humans, that largely became slowly and furtively stalking. Which people find repulsive, so that creep became anyone you find repulsive. I think that's broad to the point of signifying little but your own repulsion and dislike, just slightly different in connotation from dick or asshole.

The guy was repulsive. Intrusive. Annoying. Lot's of people would call him a creep, but in a sense largely interchangeable with loser, schmuck, or freak. I wouldn't call him creepy, as that's just the wrong connotation to me. There was nothing furtive, slow, or stealthy about his behavior. Quite the opposite. It was a full frontal assault.

Part of it was the author's discomfort with an inner conflict on ideological grounds, about being open minded towards gays. Maybe that's really part of what I would consider creepy too. In most cases, there seems to be a conflicted reaction. Wanting to get away or tell the guy to piss off, but feeling constrained in some manner from doing so. I think this is an unexplored general aspect of creepiness, that conflicted feeling within the person feeling creeped out.

Part of the conflict in "classical" creepiness is the slow and furtive stalking, so that one feels uncomfortable with rejecting someone who has yet to make an overt offer. But you want to get it over with too. The unresolved tension makes for discomfort. Sometimes that tension comes from perceived threat, wanting to stop the behavior, but not wanting to escalate the issue either. It's a discomfort that one can't resolve.

Except at the very beginning, I wouldn't have felt conflicted about the guy on the plane. My projected reaction to him would first be discomfort, then annoyance, then violation of boundaries. I didn't find the guy creepy as much as intrusive, and I wouldn't have my undies in a bunch over telling him to back off. I wouldn't have a conflict about asserting my right to space, my disinterest in his offer, or my affront when he got grabby. Knock it off, bozo.

Comment author: jooyous 30 April 2013 04:48:59PM *  3 points [-]

Ohh, I see what you're saying. I guess I won't object if you decide that you don't want to use the word "creep" to describe this guy, but I'm guessing the word originated not from the stealthy behavior of the creep, but the sensation of the person experiencing the feeling of creepiness. Because a creepy feeling is a type of growing discomfort that it's hard to pinpoint the source of. Even in horror movies, a place can be creepy because you feel like something bad is going to happen, but you don't quite know why. And indeed, it takes the narrator some thinking before he's able to figure out what made this guy's approach so much more disturbing than the usual attention he's received from gay guys before.

I'm not sure how big the issue surrounding "creep" is actually a language issue, but I think part of what's happening is that the meaning of words drift slowly enough for people to notice. For example, I have a tendency to disagree when people tell me that "lame" is ableist language, because I always think of lame as referring to jokes and maybe occasionally pack animals and ... never people. I think the usage of that word has drifted away from people, but there are enough vocal people who are still sensitive about it. (And I guess I would try to not use it around those people anyway.)

So I guess I would conclude that when you hear other people use the word creep, they probably mean "a nebulous source of discomfort that I can't quite place" rather than "an agent deliberately trying to cause me discomfort", which is definitely pretty broad, but maybe a lot less accusatory than the latter?

EDIT: Just to be extra pedantic, here are some links! :)

Comment author: shminux 30 April 2013 12:03:34AM 0 points [-]

Sorry, I meant the guy is the loser.

Comment author: jooyous 30 April 2013 12:06:22AM 1 point [-]

I did too! Edited.

Comment author: bogus 29 April 2013 11:18:42PM 1 point [-]

"What a bitch!" makes a much better soundbite than "She was probably not interested ...

And "she's just not that into you" makes a better soundbite than either - but I do agree that this is probably what's going on here. Flaking is not even that uncommon nowadays; regardless of anyone's opinion about this, it does mean that it's hard to take the female friend's comment at face value.

Comment author: jooyous 29 April 2013 11:52:53PM *  5 points [-]

Well, there's a bunch of things it communicates at once:

  • Probably you are angry, and I'm your friend so I will give you a place to vent your anger, if you want.
  • Probably you are sad, so I will try to cheer you up by telling you that what happened is not that big of a deal, because if she's not interested, then she is not worth feeling too sad about.

Meanwhile, "she's just not that into you" sounds like you're taking her side. "Well, she can do what she wants." But if you're my friend and I'm the one that the sad thing happened to, then I'd want you to keep the situation about me. So even if she is perfectly justified in being not that into me, I don't want it brought up right at that moment.

Therefore! Those girls who reacted by calling that girl a bitch probably don't actually think she's a bitch. If they encounter her later in life, they probably won't pounce on her with something like, "You're that bitch that stopped replying to my friend army1987! We totally hate you!" They are instead most likely just comforting you in a confusingly aggressive-sounding way.

Comment author: shminux 29 April 2013 11:21:58PM -2 points [-]

Give him a big L-shaped "I've been friend-zoned again" bumper sticker.

Comment author: jooyous 29 April 2013 11:41:22PM *  5 points [-]

Why is wanting to hang out with a cool person so loserly for the cool person* ?! Noooo!

I feel like staying friends with someone you went on dates with should be much better than never wanting to see them again ever.

Comment author: coffeespoons 29 April 2013 10:40:56PM *  6 points [-]

It's interesting. Suppose I go on a date with a guy, after which he decides he's not interested and doesn't want a second date. I email him a couple of days later asking if he'd like to go on another date. If he doesn't reply I'll get the message that he's not interested. I'd prefer he didn't reply at all to an email saying "sorry I'm not interested." I get the message both ways, but the first is less awkward.

Given my preferences, I have stopped replying to guys in the past. I haven't been dating at all recently, but when I start again, maybe I should send "sorry not interested" emails.

Comment author: jooyous 29 April 2013 10:48:07PM 6 points [-]

It's even worse when you start dating someone else but you want to stay friends with the guy! What are you supposed to write? "I think you're really cool but I want to date this guy over here. Can we still hang out?!"

Comment author: buybuydandavis 29 April 2013 01:08:29AM 2 points [-]

C) a man who appears to be hiding his sexual attraction from a woman is it's own kind of creepy.

Creepy casts a wide net, but that seems to me the key differentiating aspect to me. It's the unasserted desire for increased levels of intimacy or physical contact that makes for creepiness. Asserted, it might make someone uncomfortable with dealing with it. If there is a question about whether he would use force, it is more threatening than creepy.

Comment author: jooyous 29 April 2013 10:11:58PM 5 points [-]

Here is a link describing creepy, threatening desire from a man's perspective.

View more: Prev | Next