Douchebags and creeps

 

Please observe the exhibit. I’ll add notes after the graphic.

 

 

 

 

 

 

What precipitated this exchange is that a photo of Adam Levine performing on stage was tagged with one of my Facebook friends. She is the one who responds in the first 2 posts. It’s very important to note that this entire Facebook exchange is strictly women. The textual conversation among them is insightful for gives us a glimpse into the female mind during its mysterious consideration of men and their appeal while illuminating how delusional women can be about their own motives and expressions.

 

Actually, the point I’m seeking to make has nothing to do with Adam Levine or his presumed douchebaggery with the ladies.

 

Rather, I have discovered that women’s reactions to men are generally knee-jerk in nature and lacking sincere thoughtfulness. I’ve also come to the conclusion that “douchebag” and “creep” are actually two sides of the same coin. Both are concepts women default to instinctively in order to escape clearly enunciating or examining their gut reactions to men. It represents a lazy tendency on the part of women to not “own” their appraisal of men.

 

I believe douchebag is a derogatory catch-all term women use to “describe” men they would potentially have sex with; creep is a derogatory catch-all term women use to describe men they would not have sex with. Why do women seem groomed in today’s culture to refrain from speaking in glowing terms about a man? Is it some kind of “reverse peer pressure” that prevents them from heaping lavish praise on any man? Even men they like are still called douchebags. Men they call creeps are easier to dismiss.

 

Women are at liberty to speak effusively of, and gush over, food, celebrities or house furnishings. When it comes to human men, they clam up into “depersonalization” mode by barking out trite reflexive condemnations and since the terms are popular and young women are notoriously lacking creativity, creep and douchebag are currently the generally accepted terms of choice. Usage of these descriptors allows women to avoid dealing with men in real time and on genuinely human terms. Women are the biggest depersonalizers in the gender wars.

 

A female is more likely to lavish praise on a pasta dish than on a stranger she finds attractive when speaking to her girlfriends. A young woman will personalize food or a dog over a man. Creep and douchebag are the default signalling terms females use to create communion with our females equally unable to relate to men as humans. This is another function of the traditional marriage arrangement. To squeeze nearly non-existent humanity out of women.

 

 

  • “That guy’s creepy!” is just female-speak for “I’d never have sex with him, even if he was the last man on Earth!” It tells one nothing about the subject; just the speaker’s feelings about him.

    • David

      Yep, lazy non-accountability.

  • jynxi

    Give O’l Adam a job title from the local office supply store then, he quickly become the CREEP!!!

  • This comment from the propriator of this blog under his post regarding the unfunny blonde co-worker:

    “I’d tap that. Just ’cause.”

    Proving your point and accentuating my point.
    The deal is that guys really don’t like to hear or read that now gals are open about their assesments of guys. And use similar language that we have for ages.

  • Amy

    Also with regard to dehumanizing the opposite sex, men commonly reduce women to body parts or objects.

    I’d hit that. I’d tap that ass. Get me a piece of ass. Chasing tail, pussy, punanny, poontang.

    Is it really more dehumanizing to call a man a creep?

    • Abstract

      An Unmarried Man,

      I’m sure you know this, but don’t feel pressured by Amy and Mark J. Goluskin to stop posting anything that can be perceived as sexist.

      Amy,

      Men are attracted to looks. Women are attracted to status. Objectifying women is appreciating physical beauty. Only the ugly ones complain because they’re too ugly to be objectified. Beautiful women never complain about their looks. They like their physical advantages just fine. You won’t find them at slut walks or advocating feminism. Women also have an innate mechanism that takes everything concerning females personally. If you were thinking, “Are you saying that I’m ugly?” you just proved my point. If not, good for you.

      So why is it more dehumanizing to call a man creepy? As Will S. pointed out below, calling a man creepy says nothing about the man, simply the woman’s perceived status of him.

      “Objectifying a woman says nothing about her either,” you might object.

      Yes, it does. A woman’s appearance is the essence of her beauty. The sight of a woman is the first impression of something tangible, temporary yet true for a brief moment of time. It will fade in years and decades, but it is a part of her, skin deep but only skin deep. However, when a woman sees a man and deems him creepy, it is the first illusion of something that doesn’t exist. The woman may perceive him differently if she sees the man surrounded by beautiful women, dressed in a custom suit or a uniform, wiping ice cream off of a boy’s face, or giving a fishbone braid to a girl. Depending on the context, however ugly he may be, the man becomes a stud, a businessman, an officer, or a father. This, in effect, changes the woman’s perception of the man.

      “Well, a woman also changes depending on the context,” you might fume.

      No, she doesn’t. A beautiful woman looks beautiful whether she’s wearing a dress or a garbage bag. Her personality is a different matter though. Do you see how this plays out? When a man sees a beautiful woman, he has a chance to find out whether she has something more; he wants to know if she is a good person beyond her looks. When a woman sees a creepy man, she wants nothing to do with him because she assumes that there is no attraction. The former opens the door to chance; the latter shuts the door instead.

      • @Abstract, I don’t care if it is perceived as sexist. What I am just pointing out is that the gals now are as open about the way they look at guys. The problem is that the blog owner seems to not like it. But, that is kind of sort of the way things are nowadays. At least these shallow gals are OPEN about it. There are shallow men and shallow guys. It is not exactly breaking news.

      • Amy

        Abstract, WTF, did you even read my comment?

      • Amy

        Both men and women can get hung up on first impressions. A homely woman might make an excellent wife too, but that aspect of biology is fairly hard-wired.

        My first impression of my husband was “stay away from this one–he’s got baggage.” Obviously I didn’t “shut the door.”

        His first impression of me was “nice rack!”

        Of course we were smart enough to keep these thoughts to ourselves until years later.

  • So, what is different about men and women on this one? Please, we do the same thing in a different way. Men by nature are visual. Don’t tell me. You will look at the fat chick and say, “I wonder if under all that flab, she is a smart, intelligent woman?” NOPE! You will look away in disgust. Til you find out maybe that she is a terror in the sack. THAT is when the “mind” changes. No we all have our type in the opposite sex. And woman are catching on to the visual as openly as men have oh, I don’t know, like forever.

    • Amy

      I agree–this is a universal thing, the immediate gut response to the question of “hot or not?”

      Though the guys seem to size women up on a purely physical level, whereas women look for other qualities as well, which makes women’s assessments more subjective:
      http://www.newsucanuse.org/rating-attractiveness-study-finds-consensus-among-men-not-women/

      Re: douchebag–this is not a guy she would definitely do, this is a negative character assessment of a guy that doesn’t preclude hooking up with said guy (he’s just not good long-term relationship material, or not the type of guy you bring home to Mother–unless you’re just trying to piss her off).

      I get the sense that other women use the word creep for “a guy who sees me as fair game yet who I would never ever consider having sex with, so I may be inconvenienced by having to turn him down or fight him off, or by leaving.”

      “This is another function of the traditional marriage arrangement. To squeeze nearly non-existent humanity out of women.”
      Uh huh, this is why bachelors are reputed to be so civilized. Or maybe women are just scarier in L.A.

      Traditionally this is why men and women used to make these sorts of remarks when not in mixed company. We skeeve each other out when we hear it from the opposite sex but tend to wink at it when we’re talking amongst ourselves.

      Re: women not lavishing praise–I have a theory about that. If she’s really interested in the guy, why invite competition for said guy? Best not to put him on anyone else’s radar if you want a shot at him. Whereas if your friend wants your pasta dish, she will simply order her own.