659 thoughts on “You Never Know Just How You Look

Through Other People’s Eyes”

1. Gulliver says:
AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 9:08 AM
I think a lot of the disconnect on the prior thread was due to people getting the impression
(or willfully misunderstanding) that someone being creeped out by you means you must
leave the party, bus, town or planet you share with them. All it means is that you must
stop interacting with them, and that you may only resume interacting with them at their
pleasure. If you fail to respect their right not to interact with you, that’s when you get the
boot.

2. scyllacat says:
AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 9:13 AM
I think Gulliver is right. But my therapist had a hard time getting my mind around this
idea, so I can see why it can be challenging (using MYself as an anecdotal example).
Thanks for this, John. REALLY. I’ve been trying to figure out what to do about creeps,
assholes, and bullies for years now. You’re awesome.

3. Charles Hood (@charleshood) says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 9:14 AM
Actions have consequences, and we cannot control outcomes. However we often attempt
to “influence” things in order to maximize the chances of our desired outcome actually
occurring. Our success or failure rate at these attempts define our overall happiness with
this approach. This tends to divide people into the “the heck with it!” camp or the “it’s
working!” camp — both of which have issues. On one hand, as the article insinuates, it’s
not very social to simply give up and act however you want, possibly incurring lots of
negative social reactions. On the other hand, it’s also dangerous to take on responsibility
for other people’s reactions and to constantly feel disappointed when you don’t get the
results you’re expecting. As in all things, moderation is the answer — it’s okay (and
right) to try to influence things, but at the same time, don’t get too hung up if things don’t
turn out the way you plan. Such is life.

4. Josh Jasper says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 9:15 AM
 There’s an interesting discussion going on in Geek Feminism that’s somewhat related to
this, as well as a conversation about hacker manners at DefCon. A friend I have who goes
there, and is invested in the culture but upset by the creepers says that it’s a case of “fuck
you, you don’t gell me what to do” that’s embedded in hacker culture.

I can sort of see that, but I also think representatives of a dominant culture refusing to
change to accommodate a minority is sort of universal.

The guys John is seeing claiming they’re offended are similar to white folks in the US
who’re uncomfortable with criticism of endemic racism from non-whites, straight people
who get hackles up about QUILTBAG folks “shoving it down our throats” (usually by
existing outside of a closet and speaking up) and so on.

They don’t want to have to think about complicated issues of oppressions, and the
inherent complicity that they have in that oppression. It’s part not wanting to feel like a
bad person when they don’t think they did anything wrong, and part feeling like someone
is attacking something they identify as a part of.

This is usually cause (IMO) by an inability to separate criticism of one single action IN a
culture with ravening hordes seeking to destroy everything about that culture, salt the
earth, and have a party on the ashes.

Why? Because once in a while an individual that culture has offended will inevitably get
angry enough to wish, in public, that the culture be burned to the ground. And suddenly
that person becomes a representative of all criticism, just opposite from the way that a
creeper is painted as a lone-grope-man, not at all representative of this culture and HOW
DARE YOU YOU VILE… FEMINIST!

That, in a very large nutshell, is what I think is motivating the reaction to ‘point 2’.

5. Jess says:
AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 9:22 AM
I’ve been following along on this and the original post for several days. I hope that a few
people who learn something from your observations. I have a lot of thoughts about this,
but I’m not sure they’re unique enough to share here in an efficient manner. Thanks for
your words.
6. Chang, now with more Klebin 3000 says:
AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 9:32 AM
OY VEY. Some people need to get a hold of themselves. Were the complainants all
white males, too? The saying that you can’t make people think what you want them too
came up in a thread on a far off topic but it bears weight here, too. I mean… really.
Caucasoid, please!

7. drachefly says:
AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 9:41 AM
Chang, I don’t understand what you’re getting at.

8. Narkor says:
AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 9:44 AM
One thing I’ve been trying to come to terms with in this debate is how it works in the
other direction. I’ve always kinda thought it was my problem that I was uncomfortable
around women and men that were overly touchy and dressed in a way that seemed
innapropriately provocative for a given situation. Seeing your chest at the beach is fine if
your are a guy or a girl – not so much in certain social situations.

My take on my reactions is that I’m sort of in the clear on feeling uncomfortable about
the guy (though I need to keep in mind that I might be reacting in a way that may seem
homophobic) but that I’m not in the clear about my reaction to the girl (as I’d be being
judgemental about her choices of self expression).

I’m not a tall guy and that seems to give an implicit permission to some types of people
to be a lot more “friendly” with me than they would be with someone taller standing next
to me. I do find it kinda creepy – but I’ve always assumed that it’s something that I need
to get over.

9. ben says:
AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 9:47 AM
I think part of the misunderstanding here is that people are conflating being “Perceived as
a Creeper” with being “Guilty of Sexual Harassment”. So the instinct is to say “Hey, how
can you call me that, even if I’m playing by the rules?”
10. roystgnr says:
AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 9:53 AM
What I don’t generally do is demand that the other party see it my way and believe that if
they don’t then there’s something wrong with them.
…
If your takeaway from all the above is to think [X] you’re doing it wrong.
Putting lots of paragraphs in between these points was good camouflage for the irony.

11. East Coast Girl says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 9:55 AM
Thank you for this. I plan to point to this the next time I have an argument with my son
over intention vs outcome and responsibility of self actions. [Not that we have those
arguments very often anymore. Sometimes he just needs reminding.]

12. John Scalzi says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:00 AM
Roystgnr:

“Putting lots of paragraphs in between these points was good camouflage for the irony.”

There’s no irony; I’m not going to demand they see it my way. They are perfectly free to
disagree with me and act like grasping, self-serving assbags if they wish. I hope they are
happy in their choice.

13. JR says:
AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:04 AM
Graciously accepting the other’s feelings gives you a chance to show generosity and
leave people with that as their last impression in the interaction.

14. MNmom says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:04 AM
Thanks John! I have been watching in amazement at the Geek web has gone bat-shit
crazy this summer about all of this. Look, people, it is not hard. Most of the guys getting
 upset need to remember the days of nerd and geek abuse. Did it feel good when someone
set off your inner alarm? Just use about one ounce of empathy and if someone is creeped
out by something you do, you apologize and move on. It is not rocket science. The sexual
harassment issue in our community is real and the anger that emerged needs to be
listened too. I have a little girl that loves Con’s and the thought of her becoming scared
and intimidated makes me want to bitch-slap all of these apologists. Do not let this
serious discussion become overwhelmed by the Nice Guy syndrome (thanks Captain
Awkward!) and keep it focused on real abusers and not some guys working through their
refusal to admit male privilege. Oh and boys, when male rape is depicted in every genre
and screen that I have to sit through, then you might really get our fear based reactions.

15. Kathryne says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:07 AM
Years ago I heard an interview where Carl Reiner was talking about Mel Brooks. He said
that when Mel’s jokes were funny, they were hysterical but when they missed they were
just offensive. That sprang to mind reading this post this morning. We all have those
moments when we just miss for whatever reason, whether it is just the wrong audience,
the wrong timing, trying too hard, whatever. Being self aware means catching the clues
that tell you it is time to pack up and move on from the situation. As Gulliver so astutely
points out, this generally doesn’t mean you have to flee the room (note: generally; been in
situations where fleeing the room was actually a good idea…) but it does mean move
along, find a more sympathetic audience. It does require actually being self aware;
figuring out the the universe doesn’t revolve around you. The conversation from
yesterday showed a distinct lack of that sort awareness.

16. cpierson says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:09 AM
Also worth noting that how people perceive you isn’t static. They can find you charming
one day, but a pretentious/annoying/whatever git another. Might be because they’re
having a bad day, or even a bad moment; might be that your attempts at being charming
(or witty) aren’t coming off today, like a pitcher who doesn’t have his stuff that particular
start; might be some less effable* combination of factors. Hell, even best friends/loved
ones will find you grating sometimes. Still (always!) a good idea to back off/moderate
your behavior if you’re annoying those around you. This is something a lot of young
people, and geeks, and especially young geeks don’t get. I speak from experience, so take
heed. Also note that things don’t swing symmetrically: if people find you generally
annoying, it’s possible they might find you fun to be around at some specified point
(consider Stephen Baldwin in The Usual Suspects versus Stephen Baldwin in the entire
rest of his life), but it’s hard to pull off and generally a waste of everyone’s time and
 patience (and worse, if creeperish vibes are involved). Something about first impressions,
second chances, and the lack thereof. It’s a handy thing to consider when meeting
someone new — Christ, if I behaved around people I just met the way I frequently
behave around my friends, I’d probably never get the pepper spray off.

Also, I challenge your final statement. In theory, there’s a lid for every pot, and people do
exist who consider assbags to be diamonds in the rough. Women who marry dangerous
life-sentenced murderers, for instance. Also Charlie Sheen gets dates. Such cases are rare
exceptions, however, and CLEARLY no reason to actually adopt the “hey, I’ll be a
constant assbag because I gotta be me” attitude. Constant Assbag will now become the
name of my next band in Rock Band, however.

* Suspicion: not a word.

17. Frankly says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:10 AM
But what if I am a charming, amusing assbag???

Seriously, I am stunned at the amount of effort it is taking to explain these rather simple
concepts. I have never been to a comic or an SF con so I have no idea what the
environment is like. I have, however, been to many IT technical cons that are heavily
weighted toward geeks & nerds of the male gender. Many of us are not socialized as well
as we should be (its probably what made us geeks & nerds in the first place). Yet I have
never seen or heard of this sort of thing being a problem. Now, it is possible I was just
blind to it but working on panels and in breakouts with women who complained about
their own under representation and often dismissive attitudes (something I did see
frequently) I never heard them complain about creepers. Is this just something
particularly bad in the comic/SF world or what?

Even if it is how can the idea of how to deal with people be so difficult for so many?

18. Matt says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:15 AM
I think John has nailed this one. How you perceive yourself is not necessarily how others
perceive you.
 For instance, I was a small child. I distinctly remember my grandmother on several
occasions wondering if I was going to make it to puberty, etc. All of my siblings were
large. I grew up thinking of myself as a small person.

Then I hit the 11th grade and I exploded physically but my mental perception took
YEARS to catch up. The defining moment was during a game session when a young
woman, new to gaming, took something I said in character completely wrong and started
screaming at me, incoherently. I, stunned, packed my stuff and left so that the rest of the
folks could continue their evening.

It wasn’t until sometime later that I learned I that had set off several of her triggers. One
of my friends explained it to me and brought it home for me.

I don’t think of myself as large. In my mind I am the same small 12 year old in love with
gaming, RPGS, Tabletop games, etc. However, I am 6feet tall and weigh in at 325lbs. I
rarely shave so I am very scruffy looking. I AM a large man and I speak emphatically.
That makes some people VERY uncomfortable and some people find me intimidating.

So, as a result, I constantly gauge my behavior and watch those around me. I maintain a
strict no-fly zone around myself. I never approach new people closer than handshake
distance and always move at a mosey. Seeing a 300lb scruffy dude marching towards you
can be scary. I know it makes me nervous.

19. John Scalzi says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:16 AM
Frankly:

“Is this just something particularly bad in the comic/SF world or what?”

I don’t think it’s particularly bad in this world; it happens in a lot of other places as well.
We just happen to be talking about it a lot the last couple of months.

20. Nina says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:16 AM
Jeepers-creepers, I did not know that some people considered other people interacting
with them on a friendly level to be potential stalkers or just plain weird /creepy. That
shows how naive or possibly self satisfied and smug I have been in my social interaction
with the people around me, I never knew that someone could take me to be one!
 Seriously , Mr. Scalzi, anyone who does not take communicating with another person in a
matter of fact and normal manner, but instead spends her time analyzing your down to
earth and ordinary witticisms as “What did he mean by that?” “Is he flirting with me?” “I
am so not ready for this” and then “man this guy is creeping me out, is there any
underlying motive behind what he said just now?” has serious psychological issues. You
are not responsible for her cerebral meanderings. So just relax and be yourself because
you definitely cannot “read” what is going through someone else’s mind at a given period
of time and if she is “talking” to herself mentally on a totally different level altogether,
you, being a Mere Male Do not know about it. So don’t let that worry you.
Also, just for fun, next time you try to communicate with any one of the opposite gender,
I guess you’d want to laugh over this URL beforehand!
http://voices.yahoo.com/how-communicate-effectively-1943760.html?cat=60
Enjoy!

21. Peter Cashwell says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:17 AM
I wonder if the impulse to prove the other person is wrong about you is the same impulse
as “Someone Is Wrong on the Internet.”

In the latter case, you’ll spend a lot of time in comment sections, blockquoting and
howling about the context in which your remarks should have been taken, but you’re not
actually in anyone’s face, demanding that she admit her error and express her admiration
for your vast command of Wikipedia and superior linking skills.

22. endernerdcore says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:19 AM
The other way to look at it (and I really shouldn’t have to spell this out, but creepers
generally don’t even consider other perspectives) is that other people certainly can’t
control how YOU feel about them, so thinking you can do the same is completely silly.

People can’t just make themselves suddenly attractive, witty, whatever in your eyes–why
would you be able to do the same?

One of the most important things to learn in interpersonal relationships is this: some
people just won’t like you, and you just won’t like some people… that That Is OK.

23. Sooz says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:20 AM
 To me, this comes over as being about people who, if they get an adverse reaction from
someone else about their behaviour, think it is that person’s fault rather than (just
possibly) their own. It’s these people who have to develop greater self-awareness, or, as a
minimum, follow John’s guideliness even if they don’t agree with them.

24. occula says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:23 AM
Thoughtful discourse on a tough subject, with self-examination: you’re doing it right.

25. mythago says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:23 AM
@Josh Jasper, excellent points, but I suspect it ‘s also a big helping of plain old
entitlement: people are only allowed to reject me for the reasons I think are appropriate.

26. Guess says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:23 AM
Guys do not have a monopoly on being wierdos. There are plenty of crazy, annoying
women out there.

That post read like you were mixing apples and oranges. You start by talking about a guy
doing his leisure suit Larry routine and hitting on a woman and she is clearly not
interested. Agreed. If she isn’t interested, the guy should move on.

Then you move into a completely different category where someone is just talking and
the other person just decides they don’t like them. Some people won’t like you. If I don’t
like someone, I tend to just avoid the person. If you don’t like someone, then it is your
responsibility to go away. If I am at a party and one person doesn’t like me, I am not
going to leave. The flip side being, I am not going to walk up and hang out with the jerk
who just wants to talk about himself either. The bottom line is if you don’t like someone,
then its on you to go away.

I have found that as people get older, they tend to care less what people think about them.

27. Nina says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:25 AM
 Reply to Matt please.
I understand how you feel, all about the intimidating part. No wonder a number of we 6
footers try our best not to talk to people tinier than us (98% of the general population) for
more than 60 seconds at a time, because they think us scary! Accept my commiserations,
pal. Also now I understand why some people instinctively flinch when they come face to
face with me for the first time. Mr. Scalzi, it would have been better, if I had not read this
post. I’ll need to start monitoring my voice, gestures and body language. Awww heck
that takes out all the fun out of real honest to goodness communication!!!

28. James says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:26 AM
This quoted section is exactly the opposite standard when applied to race. How are you
squaring the circle when it comes to the accepted standard concerning gender interaction
and the accepted standard concerning racial interaction?

29. Jason says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:31 AM
I think that the reason that this is on topic in the fantasy/SF world is in large part because
it just happened to happen at this particular con, but also because of what someone
described as “Geek Social
Fallacies”.http://www.plausiblydeniable.com/opinion/gsf.html Or, put shorter, not
everyone has to like everyone else, and they certainly don’t have to justify liking or
disliking.

30. John Scalzi says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:31 AM
Guess:

“Guys do not have a monopoly on being wierdos.”

I invite you, Guess, to point to the part where I have said any such thing.

While you’re at it, Guess, I invite you to examine why you seem to be thinking that any
such thing has been said when it has not.

31. Todd says:

 AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:31 AM
“Your self-image is not the same as the image of you others receive. People will see often
see you entirely differently than you want them to.”

I don’t disagree with your post; however, I think it leaves out one significant component:
Most of these judgments are superficial in nature.

I am, btw, speaking within the context of a someone (usually a man) approaching a
member of the opposite sex with the obvious intent of starting some sort of a (hopefully)
personal relationship.

If you have a “look” that a particular man/woman likes, then *almost anything* you
say/do (within reasonable limits, of course) will be perceived as witty, charming,
appealing. On the other hand, if he/she does not like your “look,” then no amount of
conversational skills are likely to convince the other person to talk to you beyond the
minimum required for civility.

If you don’t immediately take the hint, then every second you linger will increase the
odds that you are labeled “a creeper.”

32. Luke Thighwalker says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:33 AM
I’ve been following this closely in the atheist/skeptic community over the past year and
it’s obviously bubbling up on other traditionally straight-white-male-centric communities
as well.

I’d like to address the Nice Guy issue, e.g. the guy who complains that being a Nice Guy
hasn’t gotten him laid and women are all liars and bitches because they ignore the Nice
Guy. I can’t recall where this came up recently (probably a podcast, maybe not) but there
is a real semantic difference to ‘nice’ and ‘kind’ which I’d never really considered which
is that nice has a subtle implication of artifice to it whereas kind carries a connotation of
sincerity. This seems consistent to me with Nice Guys who aren’t actually nice but act in
what they consider to be nice ways because they think that women will then owe them
sex.

I’ve always considered myself to be a nice guy (note lowercase). I’ve had plenty of
trouble connecting with women over the years and in fact been told by some that I’m “too
nice” What I take from this consistent issue is:
 1 – I’m attracted to women who aren’t into guys like me
b – This is my problem, not theirs

I can continue to pursue women who have no interest in me, but it would be absurd for
me to then complain about them not being interested in me. One’s reach should exceed
one’s grasp etc etc.

33. John Scalzi says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:34 AM
Todd:

Even if your point is correct, which I don’t concede it is: So what?

34. Luke Thighwalker says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:37 AM
@mythago

I’m dealing with a creeper issue right now (not creeping on me, but on several female
friends of mine). The attitude of creepers tends to be more that they wont’ accept being
rejected at all, because that implies agency on the part of their target. They don’t view
their targets as actual people.

I will clarify that I refer here to serial creepers rather than just the casually socially
awkward who can sometimes be creepy without realizing it.

35. Kilroy says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:40 AM
Think the dude dressed as a Jedi might be creeping on the girl dressed as the girl from
Hunger Games right now. No wait, she just handed him a huge halberd. I can’t figure out
GenCon, but love watching it.

36. bookdragon says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:40 AM
First, I can’t believe it’s taken me this long to find this blog (I plead 2 kids + full-time job
for my web ignorance).
 Second, thank you. This whole discussion is wonderful and I’ve been using pieces of it to
discuss boundaries and trusting your feelings with my pre-teen daughter who, owing to
being tall and developing early, has been mistaken a few times for being a number of
years older than she actually is. Sadly, the ‘Hey, don’t get upset. I was just playing
around.’ response is already well-established among boys 12-15 in our neck of the
woods, as is the implied message that the girl ought to be one to feel guilty if she calls a
guy on creepy behavior because she’s somehow insulted him or hurt his feelings by
saying that she doesn’t appreciate the way he’s behaving.

It’s also made me think seriously about the mixed messages I’ve probably unintentionally
modeled. I’m an introvert and, to put it mildly, not a touchy-feelly person. However, I
know that I’m not exactly normal in that regard, esp. in terms of what is considered
normal for women. So I endure, as graciously as I can, unwanted hugs and little touches
from acquaintances who consider those things to be normal, friendly behavior. (I’m
already enough of an anti-social weirdo among the set of other mothers associated with
my kids’ school. No need to make that worse). So I’ve found that I really need to explain
threatening vs. non-threatening, creepy vs. too-extroverted-to-get-how-introverts-feel,
etc. All of these are things are not easy to think though or explain, so I am very grateful
for someone as articulate as you (and many of the commenters here) to help me formulate
those explanations.

37. Karina says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:45 AM
@ Nina – Nice. Bitchez be crazy, right? (I read your linked article – your point, other
than “Crazy bitchez” is?)

I think you need to re-read that article a little bit – for someone with all of your “degrees”
I wonder at your reading comprehension.

38. John Scalzi says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:48 AM
Karina:

Let’s holster the “reading comprehension” cracks, please. In most cases it crosses the line
from civil to something else (says the guy who uses it himself from time to time, but
whose site it is and therefore has slightly more leeway on these things).
39. The Pint says:
AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:48 AM
Something that we all need to learn even though it’s hard and can hurt: Not everyone will
like you. No matter how good your intentions or how hard you try. And that’s ok. But
when you keep pushing because you feel slighted that they “haven’t give you a chance
and they’d just change their minds if-” NO. That’s where you stop right there, because no
one is obligated to do anything of the sort. And the thing is, that works both ways –
you’re not obligated to “like” someone or give a person more allowances than you’re
comfortable with, either.

40. dersk says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 10:52 AM
@Nina: if you normally don’t pay attention to how people are reacting to your language,
gestures or body language, you haven’t been communicating in the first place.

41. Karina says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 11:05 AM
@dersk – you said it much more politely and helpfully than I have.

With the risk of getting off-topic, If anyone is interested in a bit of reading on what Nina
appears to consider to be typical interactions with women – read her link.

It is still headdeskingly frustrating that the rule – you don’t get to dictate other people’s
opinions of you – seems to be hard to get.

42. The Pint says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 11:06 AM
@ Nina

“Seriously , Mr. Scalzi, anyone who does not take communicating with another person in
a matter of fact and normal manner, but instead spends her time analyzing your down to
earth and ordinary witticisms as “What did he mean by that?” “Is he flirting with me?”
“I am so not ready for this” and then “man this guy is creeping me out, is there any
underlying motive behind what he said just now?” has serious psychological issues. You
are not responsible for her cerebral meanderings.”
 I have to take issue with this. The reason pieces like this, Scalzi’s original post, and the
multiple posts covering these topics on Dr. Nerdlove, Pervocracy and Captain Awkward
exist are because there are LOTS of people out there for whom communicating in a
“matter of fact and normal manner” is difficult and confusing. Human beings do not
spring into being automatically understanding social norms or behaviors – we have to
LEARN them and not everyone learns the same way (some people are not neurotypical
and there is NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT) or even has the opportunity to learn how
to navigate the complexities of social interaction.

Your implication that women who analyze context of people’s (often male) words and
behavior only due so because of “psychological issues” demonstrates a disturbing amount
of ignorance about the space women occupy in our patriarchal culture, in which women,
when victims of harassment/assault/rape, are often subjected to “Didn’t you think
something was wrong because of X?” “Why didn’t you notice A,B and C?” “What were
you thinking?!?” Whether that’s willful or naivete, I don’t know, but given the “Bitchez
be crazy” tone of your posts and the piece you linked to, I’d have to lean toward the
former.

No, a person is not responsible for the “cerebral meanderings” of another person, but it’s
basic common courtesy to be CONSIDERATE of how your actions are being received by
another person and respecting the boundaries and comfort level of others. It’s called
empathy.

43. isabelcooper says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 11:09 AM
@Todd: And if I were JK Rowling, I wouldn’t need a day job. I’ve used a similar
response before, but it’s an old line, and, as our host noted, a rather pointless one if true.

Which brings up another good point: even outside of the actually-creepy realm, as The
Pint says, nobody is obligated to like anyone else. Nobody is obligated to hang out with
anyone else. In giant common spaces like cons or even in smaller mutual social circles,
I’m going to tolerate Guy With Zero Volume Control or Every Conversation Must Be
About Family Guy Girl, but I’m going to look for polite excuses to avoid them, and I’m
generally not going to invite them to my own parties.

I think that’s fine. Everyone has the right to select their own company; they can moderate
their habits, or find people who don’t mind Loud Howard or really really like Family Guy
too. I wish them well. At least, I wish them well until they start getting all guilt-trippy
and resentful, or using words/phrases like “superficial” or “friend zone”*, at which point
I hope they get eaten by bears.
 *Seriously, that phrase, if you use it non-ironically, pretty much marks you as someone I
have no interest in talking to, ever.

44. Christopher Hinkle (@chinkleDC) says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 11:11 AM
I’d love to print this post out and give it to someone I know… but even then they
probably won’t get it. If one is firmly of the notion that one can and should be able to
control another person’s thoughts about one, then one is likely to require more
psychological help than can be provided through an eloquently-worded blog post.

Also, I love the Butthole Surfers quote for the title of this post.

45. Stevie says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 11:20 AM
The Pint

I’m still baffled as to why Nina thinks that John only ever talks to women…

46. Amelia Eve says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 11:20 AM
In a way this is really a marketplace issue. You can offer what you have (your friendship)
and others are free to accept it or ignore it. If you’re smart, you will learn from these
interactions how to make your product appeal to the customers (friends) you want to
attract. Hectoring them and telling them why they are wrong is not usually going to result
in more effective and satisfying transactions.

Sometimes it’s easier to see the outlines of the interactions if you consider a different
venue, for example a job interview. Normally you would prepare yourself by trying to
find out what the employer is looking for and presenting yourself in a way that would
make them want to hire you. If they don’t hire you, do you think it’s really going to help
for you to keep telling them what a big mistake they’ve made? It’s not a way to win
friends, either.

People are free to choose who they want to interact with and who they don’t, just as they
are free to choose who to hire and what kind of shampoo to buy.
47. martin says:
AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 11:23 AM
Given this is a writer’s blog, I’m surprised that no one has brought up the (to me) obvious
analogy. The issue in question is very similar to the writing principle of “You don’t get to
choose how your readers interpret your prose,” right down to having similar corollaries.
(“But you are still responsible for what you wrote,” “But if you don’t try to say
something worthwhile anyway that is your failure, not your readers,” and “No matter
how hard you try or how skillful you are, there are inevitably going to be people who take
your intention not just wrongly, but outright WRONGOMFGWTFBBQLY.”)

48. The Pint says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 11:29 AM
This quoted section is exactly the opposite standard when applied to race. How are you
squaring the circle when it comes to the accepted standard concerning gender interaction
and the accepted standard concerning racial interaction?
Comparing race to the creeper behavior as Scalzi has outlined is a false comparison –
race is part of who a person IS and is immutable, creeping is a BEHAVIOR that can be
changed.

49. The Pint says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 11:30 AM
@ Stevie – well clearly it’s because women are the only ones being hysterical here. ;)

50. Lorenzo Farris says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 11:32 AM
One fundamental problem I have with this post. Yes, I cannot help how other people
react to me. However, we can insist on mutual respect and compassion, regardless. You
can’t help how people react to: your funny accent, your choice of cologne, how you
dress, the nationality implied by your last name, the unfamiliarity of your first name, your
profession, your religion, your gender, your weight, your sexual orientation, your choice
in jewelry, your choices in body art and piercings, your lack of body art or piercings, etc.,
etc.

I deal with people every day that have some characteristic I am uncomfortable with for
my own reasons. That does not give me the right to treat anyone with disrespect. I can’t
 tell how other people see me, unless they tell me. However, I can make an effort to see
things from their perspective, I can strive for some empathy and compassion and respect.

51. Lorenzo Farris says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 11:35 AM
My point in the above comment: my being uncomfortable with someone doesn’t make
them a creeper. If they don’t respect me, my privacy, my boundaries, and act like they
have some right to my attention, then they are a creeper.

52. The Pint says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 11:37 AM
Lorenzo – I agree with the sentiment about how we should treat others with mutual
respect and compassion, but I think you’re conflating “no one is obligated to like you”
with giving people a license to be disrespectful to people you don’t like. Choosing to not
to interact with someone is not automatically disrespectful – often, choosing not to
interact with someone can often be respectful because you are *respecting their apparent
desire not to interact with you.* People can move in the same social circles but not
interact without being disrespectful to each other. We can acknowledge that there are
people with whom we want nothing to do with and still acknowledge their humanity. Not
wanting to interact with someone and treating others with respect and compassion are not
mutually exclusive.

53. John Scalzi says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 11:38 AM
Lorenzo Farris:

“However, we can insist on mutual respect and compassion, regardless.”

Well, no. You can choose to treat people with what you believe is mutual respect and
compassion, and I would encourage that. You cannot insist that they interpret what you
offer exactly as you intended to offer it. And if they reject what you offer or interpret
differently than how you intended to offer it, you can’t insist they see it your way.

54. wizardru says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 11:39 AM
 It doesn’t hurt also to consider the possibility that you have no idea of the context of what
a particular person may perceive you under. You may make a joke that a week prior
would have been funny, but this week something has happened that makes that same joke
incredibly distasteful, insensitive or hurtful to a person. You may be entirely unaware of
that fact, but it doesn’t matter to the receiver. You might be the tenth or hundredth person
to hit on a person at the con that day who is rather tired of it and you just crossed their
threshold of ‘getting creeped out’. You don’t get to decided how they react or why. You
can only be responsible for your own part of the equation and how you handle yourself
during the interaction.

55. Karina says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 11:39 AM
@ Lorenzo – I don’t think you’re disagreeing with anything here! You hit the nail on the
head with “that does not give me right to treat anyone with disrespect”.

That above thought includes allowing others NOT to engage with you if they choose to,
even for erroneous (aka – unintentionally to you off-putting) reasons!

56. Greg says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 11:42 AM
Scalzi: This apparently has struck some to be dreadfully unfair, with the implication
being that other people responding to folks (usually men) as creepers when in fact they’re
trying to make an effort to be charming and witty and fun (or whatever) is some sort of
special case

I was thinking about the previous thread comparing “Alice thinks Bob is a creeper” to
“Charlie shoulder checks Dave, calls him a prick, and laughs”. It was the “and laughs”
part that stood out as a psychological tell. The perception from Bob’s point of view of
being called a creeper when he misunderstood Alice’s signals, is that it’s an attack on his
honor.

And for the folks already winding up their spleens to vent at me about how it doesn’t
matter that it’s honor, yes. you’re right. When trying to deal at a systemic level with
creepers and harrassment, it doesn’t matter what the motivations are. Jeebus. I get it.

But at the same time, when trying to address creepers and harrassment at a systemic
level, there is nothing to be gained by attacking people for being driven by fairness and
 are heavily motivated by honor. Because by themselves, fairness and honor do not make
someone a creeper.

This is one of those situations where I think Gulliver’s tweak to the definition of
“creeper” makes a huge difference. If you define creeper as someone who makes
someone else feel uncomfortable/unsafe, then folks who get wound up because someone
“laughed at them” are going to get wound up about the definition of creeper. Because the
definition says they’re a creeper if any other person in the world thinks they are. If
someone is motivated by honor, then this definition is about the worst possible thing in
the world.

And what happened on the other thread was someone compared the unfairness of the
definition of creeper with the unfairness of someone walking down the street, calling you
a prick, shoulder checking you, and laughing.

If you tweak the definiton to say someone is a creeper if they make someone feel
uncomfortable and they don’t do anything to make the person feel comfortable again
(apologize and leave, usually), then who is and is not a creeper is not entirely in someone
else’s hands, it’s not entirely defined by any individual anywhere in the world. The
person accused of being a creeper by someone can prove they’re not by apologizing and
leaving them alone.

If they’re a creeper only based on what the other person thinks, then they’re motivated to
try and change the other person’s mind, to hang around, to persist, to try and convince
them otherwise. If the person is motivated by honor, what what other people think of him,
then this feeds into it and makes everything worse.

If they can avoid being a creeper by leaving the person alone, then their isn’t the
motivation to try and change the other person’s mind. They just leave the other person
alone, and they’re not a creeper. If the person is motivated by honor, then they can keep
their honor by simply walking away, proving they’re not a creeper.

57. Jon says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 11:45 AM
I can’t believe that some people need to have this explained to them. And that there are
still others who think they have a leg to stand on when they argue against it. It’s
embarrassing.
58. Josh Jasper says:
AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 11:50 AM
Lorenzo,

If you want to respect and feel nice things towards everyone, that’s your choice.
Sometimes people’s actions make me angry, or uncomfortable, or otherwise not
respectful or compassionate. I’m not a defective person because I feel that way, and my
actions are not defective if I choose to confront that person in order to remove the source
of my discomfort, and am not particularly interested in seeing things from their
perspective.

59. Greg says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 11:56 AM
Josh: Sometimes people’s actions make me angry, or uncomfortable, or otherwise not
respectful or compassionate. I’m not a defective person because I feel that way, and my
actions are not defective if I choose to confront that person in order to remove the source
of my discomfort

And sometimes, you’re wrong.

60. Stevie says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 11:57 AM
Greg

Just to let you know, the use of the word ‘hono(u)r’ in any conversation about the way in
which men and women interact sexually is a trigger for a lot of women, me included.

So called ‘honour killings’ in which women are murdered because they seem not to
comply with religious doctrines are depressingly familiar and it really does not help when
someone tries to introduce that concept into an area which has hitherto been free of it…

61. Sean Eric Fagan says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 11:57 AM
I will respond to:
 2. Acknowledge that you don’t get to define other people’s comfort level with you. Which
is to say that you may be trying your hardest to be interesting and engaging and fun to be
around — and still come off as a creeper to someone else. Yes, that sucks for you. But
you know what? It sucks for them even harder, because you’re creeping them out and
making them profoundly unhappy and uncomfortable. It may not seem fair that “creep”
is their assessment of you, but: Surprise! It doesn’t matter, and if you try to argue with
them (or anyone else) that you’re in fact not being a creep and the problem is with them
not you, then you go from “creep” to “complete assbag.” Sometimes people aren’t going
to like you or want to be near you. It’s just the way it is.
with this quote:

Are there any queers in the theatre tonight?

Get 'em up against the wall. -- 'Gainst the wall!

And that one in the spotlight, he don't look right to me.

Get him up against the wall. -- 'Gainst the wall!

And that one looks Jewish, and that one's a coon.

Who let all this riffraff into the room?

There's one smoking a joint, and another with spots!

If I had my way I'd have all of ya shot.

62. Bolts says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 11:58 AM
@Nina

I believe that you and I have vastly different interpretations of the same article we just
read.

Here is what I didn’t read: I didn’t just read a piece wherein an author bemoaned having
to care about what other people think of him.

I did just read a piece that seemed to merely explain that we (with the author using
himself as an example), as mere humans, cannot choose how other people see us,
 regardless of our intentions. And, as a part of being a human, he accepts that some people
won’t want to hang around him. Even if that’s not his fault (read: not his intention to give
someone the creeps or the ughs), that’s still OK if they don’t want to be near him.

Yeah, it does kinda suck when someone doesn’t get you as a person. That doesn’t mean
they have to give you the time of day or to be “fair” and let you explain until they get
you. *

I found your initial reply to be harshly dismissive. This article was not centered upon
someone’s “cerebral meanderings”. That phrase alone is dismissive in that context. And
coupled with the rest of your reply seems to imply that the only time a woman finds a
man’s company unpleasant is when she’s reading too much into the situation. (Oh, gee,
those women thinking too much…)

Also! That a woman has to be held to a standard where she can fully see the intentions of
another person approaching her (the whole “but he was only being friendly” to someone
who doesn’t attack her, but if someone does attack her then the comments become “but
why didn’t you get a creepy vibe and then leave?”), and those other people who are doing
the approaching aren’t made to examine their own behaviors let alone appreciate the fact
that their intentions don’t matter if someone doesn’t want to be around them for any
reason.

This article, and the other ones it’s connected to, stem from cases (and a general vibe in
the community, if you will) of women’s boundaries not being respected, and heck in
some cases not even being acknowledged as a thing that exists. Specifically this happens
to be about what’s going on in the fan convention world, but also less specifically
everywhere that women are, which is… everywhere.

(*general yous in places where general yous are needed.)

63. NotKelly says:

AUGUST 16, 2012 AT 12:01 PM
I am wondering where this fictional creeper is who would actually read this article and
cure himself of creepitude. Any man who can read this article and say “Yeah, that’s me”
and desire not to be so, probably isn’t even labeled a creeper by others. You can’t reason
with a creeper; that’s why they are best avoided by women or their other potential
victims.
2. Acknowledge that you don’t get to define other people’s comfort level with
you. Which is to say that you may be trying your hardest to be interesting and engaging
and fun to be around — and still come off as a creeper to someone else. Yes, that sucks
for you. But you know what? It sucks for them even harder, because you’re creeping them
out and making them profoundly unhappy and uncomfortable. It may not seem fair that
“creep” is their assessment of you, but: Surprise! It doesn’t matter, and if you try to
argue with them (or anyone else) that you’re in fact not being a creep and the problem is
with them not you, then you go from “creep” to “complete assbag.” Sometimes people
aren’t going to like you or want to be near you. It’s just the way it is.
This apparently has struck some to be dreadfully unfair, with the implication
being that other people responding to folks (usually men) as creepers when in
fact they’re trying to make an effort to be charming and witty and fun (or
whatever) is some sort of special case in the interaction of human beings, and
that such mismatches between intent and reception hardly ever happen in other
situations.

To which my response is: you have got to be kidding me. Outside of the realm of
possible potential creepiness, you don’t get to choose how other people respond
to you, either. In any context. Indeed, regardless of your efforts to present
yourself in a certain way, it is almost certain you will come across to some other
people as not that way at all, and possibly the opposite of that way entirely.
Let me, as I so often do for matters such as this, use myself as a good anecdotal
example. You know, generally I try to be amusing; some people don’t find me
amusing in the least. I try to write engaging books; there are people who can’t
stand my writing. I often speak up on issues that are of concern to me; there are
people who wish I would shut up about them, including some folks who are
nominally on my side of an issue. I try to be pleasant with people; to some people
I come across as insufferable, glib or insincere. I try to be open and upfront about
most of my opinions; some people see that as me being an arrogant asshole.
And so on.

I’m not gonna lie, here: I don’t really see myself as a glib, unamusing asshole
who writes awful books and doesn’t know when to shut up. But despite my best
efforts not to be any of those things, there will be people who think at least one
(and possibly all) of those things about me. Because in their heads, that’s how
they see me. It doesn’t mean they’re having a psychotic break with reality.
There’s enough room for variation in basic human interaction for this sort of thing,
even before you add in everyone’s own personal life experience to the mix —
their own personal reasons for thinking a person acting like I do might be glib
rather than pleasant, as an example.
What can I do when I try to be [x], and I come off as not[x] to some other person?
In the very short run, not much of anything. People are going to respond to me
the way they’re going to respond to me, for all the reasons they have that
response. I’m not going to know all those reasons unless I try to engage them in
a Quest for Context, which may not be convenient or appropriate at the time. I’m
best off accepting that to them, that’s how I’ve come across.

The next thing I can do is ask myself, well, do they have a point? Am I being
glib/unamusing/an asshole? Because sometimes they’re right and I am wrong. In
which case, fair enough. I’ve learned something and will work to fix my behavior.
Note that this requires a certain amount of personal honesty and willingness for
critical self-examination that everyone says they have but lots of people actually
don’t. On the other hand, If I decide they don’t have a point, then I generally chalk
it up to people having differences of opinion and let it go.
What I don’t generally do is demand that the other party see it my way and
believe that if they don’t then there’s something wrong with them. One, who has
the time, and two, I’m not sure it’s really important that everyone respond to me
in precisely the same way.
(If one does have time and the other party has an interest, one could talk to them
about the variance and see where the disconnect is. But sometimes one party or
the other doesn’t have that interest or time; that’s fine too. If one does that,
however, one probably shouldn’t do it with the underlying thesis of “let’s discover
why you’re so very wrong in your opinion about me and how we can fix that.”
Most other people won’t sign up for that.)
Bottom line here: Your self-image is not the same as the image of you others
receive. People will often see you entirely differently than you want them to. No
one’s required to see you the way you see yourself, and you probably can’t make
them do that even (or often especially) if you try. If you try to insist that they must,
the likelihood of you coming across as petulant and unpleasant rises significantly.

So, no, in this respect, some people (often women) seeing other people (often
men) as creepers when those other people are trying to be interesting and
engaging and fun is not actually an unusual reaction dynamic at all.
What is different about the creeper scenario is that there is very often a physical
and psychological dynamic that has threatening possibilities to it. Which to my
mind makes it more important for people to realize in that situation that they don’t
have the ability to dictate how others respond to them, and to accept that as part
of the ground rules going in.
One final point: If your takeaway from all the above is to think “If I can’t control
how other people respond to me, then I’m relieved of my duty to be concerned
about how I come across,” then you’re doing it wrong. People may respond to
you differently than you intend; you should still make an effort not to be a
grasping, self-centered assbag. In my experience, being a grasping, self-
centered assbag is one of the very few times where how you present yourself is
exactly how other people see you, every time, without exception.