Creep Identification

[SnowDancer]

Every woman and every man is different, but what you are saying is essentially the same thing I was saying--whether men have the same "innate ability" or not, the reality remains that women are more intuitive. I'm not sure "ability" makes a difference since most people, men and women, don't usually make a conscious "decision" to use their intuition abilities. They just do, or don't.
l

Thinking about this, and how it relates to the topic: I believe that men who come off as 'creepy' often lack intuition, in that they can't tell that a woman isn't attracted to them. It's possible for a man to be flirtatious, even outrageously so, if he can tell whether that behaviour is welcome. The 'creepy' ones are indiscriminate: They hit on every woman they find attractive, not being aware that they're making them uncomfortable.

 

[Sabrosura]

Thinking about this, and how it relates to the topic: I believe that men who come off as 'creepy' often lack intuition, in that they can't tell that a woman isn't attracted to them. It's possible for a man to be flirtatious, even outrageously so, if he can tell whether that behaviour is welcome. The 'creepy' ones are indiscriminate: They hit on every woman they find attractive, not being aware that they're making them uncomfortable.

Yes, and this lack of intuition and awareness of women's signals and emotional state is evolutionary and ties in with what I was saying before. While it makes sense for women to be selective as to their partners, it makes sense for men to not be selective and to assume the woman is interested even if she isn't. A man who courted all the women he found attractive assuming they were all interested had a chance that one of them would be interested eventually, whereas a man who was more careful and assumed none of those women were interested in him (which is the more likely scenario given that the more attractive a woman is the more selective she is likely to be) obviously had zero chances of coupling up. Thus the genes that got passed on were those of men that were less intuitive, more risk-taking and more "oblivious" to women's subtle signals and emotional state. Sound familiar?

Similarly, the women who were more successful from a reproductive perspective were those who were more intuitive and thus better at distinguishing between the men who just wanted one night stands and those who would actually stick around to help provide for the children and also had the necessary resourcefulness, intelligence, etc. to obtain resources, social status, etc.

 

[tripleg]

Yes, and this lack of intuition and awareness of women's signals and emotional state is evolutionary...

I am back.

Turns out there is a much better evolutionary explanation for this phenomena of misreading female signals. And this explanation is corroborated by data. It is that female's are DECEPTIVE in romantic contexts.

"Evolutionary theory, said Place, predicts a certain level of coyness or even deceptiveness in women because if a relationship is abandoned they may face greater costs, including pregnancy and child rearing..."

NOTE FROM ME: The quote above is an explanation NOT a justification!

"When it comes to assessing the romantic playing field -- who might be interested in whom -- men and women were shown to be equally good at gauging men's interest during an Indiana University study involving speed dating -- and equally bad at judging women's interest. "

"The hardest-to-read women were being misperceived at a much higher rate than the hardest-to-read men. Those women were being flirtatious, but it turned out they weren't interested at all,"
Evolutionary theory, said Place, predicts a certain level of coyness or even deceptiveness in women because if a relationship is abandoned they may face greater costs, including pregnancy and child rearing.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news152526254.html#jCp

Love,
G

 

[Sabrosura]

I am back.

Turns out there is a much better evolutionary explanation for this phenomena of misreading female signals. And this explanation is corroborated by data. It is that female's are DECEPTIVE in romantic contexts.

"Evolutionary theory, said Place, predicts a certain level of coyness or even deceptiveness in women because if a relationship is abandoned they may face greater costs, including pregnancy and child rearing..."

NOTE FROM ME: The quote above is an explanation NOT a justification!

"When it comes to assessing the romantic playing field -- who might be interested in whom -- men and women were shown to be equally good at gauging men's interest during an Indiana University study involving speed dating -- and equally bad at judging women's interest. "

"The hardest-to-read women were being misperceived at a much higher rate than the hardest-to-read men. Those women were being flirtatious, but it turned out they weren't interested at all,"
Evolutionary theory, said Place, predicts a certain level of coyness or even deceptiveness in women because if a relationship is abandoned they may face greater costs, including pregnancy and child rearing.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news152526254.html#jCp

Love,
G

Yes, this is another facet, but it does not contradict what I said above, it just adds to one of the most complex human behavior topics.

You failed to mention women's most sophisticated deception mechanism which trumps all other degrees of coyness : humans appear to be the *only* species in which females' ovulation, i.e. their most fertile period, is "concealed" and occurs without any noticeable signals. Every other species flaunts it, women hide it--so well that sometimes women themselves can't tell when it occurs. While most species' females are only sexually attractive to the males when they ovulate, humans' evolution has shaped women and men so that men are attracted to women all the time. (Studies show that women dress more provocatively and are more flirtatious when they ovulate, but most men--or women--cannot tell when a woman is at her peak fertility; another study showed that female strippers get significantly higher tips when they are ovulating, likely an effect of their dancing more provocatively and flirtatiously). In addition, while other species are only fertile a few times a year, women are fertile every month.

Why so? The reasons why this may have evolved are complex, including to make men more likely to form long-term bonds with the woman given the permanent attraction, and, from a deception perspective, the advantage that women in monogamous relationships had when they were able to have one night stands with other men they found more attractive than their partners (another observed effect at ovulation is that women are more attracted to more "masculine" men), effectively obtaining those "attractive" genes for their children while continuing to benefit from the resources provided by the long-term partner who would have no idea the children were not theirs. See the article I posted on the other thread: http://salsaforums.com/threads/married-and-dancing-without-spouse.22490/page-2#post-252122

 

[SnowDancer]

A man who courted all the women he found attractive assuming they were all interested had a chance that one of them would be interested eventually, whereas a man who was more careful and assumed none of those women were interested in him (which is the more likely scenario given that the more attractive a woman is the more selective she is likely to be) obviously had zero chances of coupling up. Thus the genes that got passed on were those of men that were less intuitive, more risk-taking and more "oblivious" to women's subtle signals and emotional state. Sound familiar?

So 'creeps' are more evolved. But there is another issue here, and that is the risk a man takes when he approaches a woman. One claim I read is that the reason many men have such huge fears approaching strange women is because, in more primitive times, it could be extremely dangerous. The woman might have a mate or family members that could respond violently. Even in historical times, showing interest in a woman above one's class could get a fellow killed.

As a woman, you probably encounter more creeps than shy men, because the latter don't approach you. I still think the best strategy for a guy is to develop good intuition at reading the receptiveness of women. (A win-win for everyone!)

 

[tripleg]

I still think the best strategy for a guy is to develop good intuition at reading the receptiveness of women. (A win-win for everyone!)

Or women could make a conscious effort to STOP HIDING INTEREST and to STOP FAKING INTEREST. Yes we can acknowledge that it's how they are biologically, but that doesn't justify it. By that standard murder and rape could be justified as well. I assure you if women reciprocated interest when interested and didn't fake interest when disinterested, dating would suddenly become much easier and more fun for everyone. Win-win indeed!

 

[tripleg]

Of course there is always your proposed alternative for men to develop extraordinary intuition just to overcome women's deceptions, but I think having women drop the deceptions makes more sense.

 

[Sabrosura]

Or women could make a conscious effort to STOP HIDING INTEREST and to STOP FAKING INTEREST. Yes we can acknowledge that it's how they are biologically, but that doesn't justify it. By that standard murder and rape could be justified as well. I assure you if women reciprocated interest when interested and didn't fake interest when disinterested, dating would suddenly become much easier and more fun for everyone. Win-win indeed!

I sense judgment/bitterness/misunderstanding of women in what you wrote.

Sorry, but men are also biologically wired -- to like a challenge. If a woman is physically attracted to a man and sleeps with him immediately, thus reciprocating his interest, what does the man label her as, consciously or subconsciously? Definitely *not* girlfriend material, which won't stop the average man from going ahead and enjoy that one night stand with her and then never calling her again.

Whereas a woman who is clearly happy with herself and confident about who she is and appears to not "need" a man and therefore is selective, is the one men will want to have and be around, because she clearly has "high value". Men have been wired to compete with other men for social status, resources, and women, and want to feel that they're "winning", whether they admit it or not; so a woman that has such low confidence and self-esteem that she just hands herself to them on a plate before she has a chance to "evaluate" their qualities is not what will make them feel like they're "winners", even if they will go for the one night stand or hook-up. You can deny this all you want, but that's the reality and it's not going to change any time soon.

And, you are comparing social interactions like not showing interest with murder and rape?! In a way *everything* we do is governed by selfish biological impulses that are then controlled and refined, to a degree, by our higher consciousness, but there is a difference between a woman or man's various interactions with a potential partner, and rape or murder.

 

[SnowDancer]

Or women could make a conscious effort to STOP HIDING INTEREST and to STOP FAKING INTEREST. Yes we can acknowledge that it's how they are biologically, but that doesn't justify it. By that standard murder and rape could be justified as well. I assure you if women reciprocated interest when interested and didn't fake interest when disinterested, dating would suddenly become much easier and more fun for everyone. Win-win indeed!

Women have a good reason to hide interest; they need to determine if a man has the qualities they're looking for, and it's not something apparent at first glance. This is a good thing for us men who aren't especially physically attractive; because the alternative would be that women would jump on the hot guys, and we wouldn't have a chance. Women have strong reasons to be cautious, or at least subtle.

And I don't think murder and rape are normal human activities. I believe we've evolved to get along, and also to enjoy sex and get our partners to enjoy it.

 

[Sabrosura]

Women have a good reason to hide interest; they need to determine if a man has the qualities they're looking for, and it's not something apparent at first glance. Women have strong reasons to be cautious, or at least subtle.

Not least of all is the possibility of rape. Most rapists are not strangers, but men the victim knew or even went out with. Some men seem to forget this when they complain women mistrust men and want to wait a long time before sleeping with them. If anything, women should be even more cautious with male acquaintances and men they date, especially young men (see average age of rapists below).

Here is a reminder of rape facts:

73% of sexual assaults are perpetrated by a non-stranger.

• 38% of rapists are a friend or acquaintance.

• 28% are an intimate
• 7% are a relative
• The average age of a rapist is 31 years old

In a survey of male college students:

• 35% anonymously admitted that, under certain circumstances, they would commit rape if they believed they could get away with it
• 84% of men who committed rape did not label it as rape
• 43% of men admitted to using coercive behavior to have sex, including ignoring a woman's protest, using physical aggression, and forcing intercourse

 

[tripleg]

I sense judgment/bitterness/misunderstanding of women in what you wrote.

I sense feminist ideology.

 

[tripleg]

The most ironic part is that by hiding and faking interest women discourage the advances of the more polite and 'tame' guys, you know the kind they claim to want. Meanwhile the guys who are more aggressive and careless are the ones who tend to better pass their screens. So their own behavior tends to screen out the kind of men they claim to want and rewards the 'jerks' that they're always complaining about but somehow they just keep ending up with them.

 

[Sabrosura]

I sense feminist ideology.

Lol, that's all you have to say to what I wrote? "Feminist man-hatred"? How disappointing. I thought we were discussing evolutionary biology not "ideologies".

FYI: I love men -- and I just nullified your "argument".

 

[Kading]

I sense judgment/bitterness/misunderstanding of women in what you wrote.

Sorry, but men are also biologically wired -- to like a challenge. If a woman is physically attracted to a man and sleeps with him immediately, thus reciprocating his interest, what does the man label her as, consciously or subconsciously? Definitely *not* girlfriend material, which won't stop the average man from going ahead and enjoy that one night stand with her and then never calling her again.

Whereas a woman who is clearly happy with herself and confident about who she is and appears to not "need" a man and therefore is selective, is the one men will want to have and be around, because she clearly has "high value". Men have been wired to compete with other men for social status, resources, and women, and want to feel that they're "winning", whether they admit it or not; so a woman that has such low confidence and self-esteem that she just hands herself to them on a plate before she has a chance to "evaluate" their qualities is not what will make them feel like they're "winners", even if they will go for the one night stand or hook-up. You can deny this all you want, but that's the reality and it's not going to change any time soon.

And, you are comparing social interactions like not showing interest with murder and rape?! In a way *everything* we do is governed by selfish biological impulses that are then controlled and refined, to a degree, by our higher consciousness, but there is a difference between a woman or man's various interactions with a potential partner, and rape or murder.

This is not only with woman and man relationships. You also see this on the work floor alot. There are alot of good managers that do not compliment people alot, but when they do people feel really good about it. People like to be respected and acknowledged, and we only feel respected and acknowledged if people say it who are pretty selective about who to say it to

The big boss of our department is that type of guy, Being very direct, demanding and asking alot of his people. If you don't do your job correctly you will know and he does not sugartalk things. However if you did do an above average job he will come to you, shout your name and look you straight in the eye "You did good." and he truely means it. You can tell everyone feels really good if the big boss says it to you because a) you know he means it and b) you will not get a compliment from him if you did not earn it.

 

[Sabrosura]

The most ironic part is that by hiding and faking interest women discourage the advances of the more polite and 'tame' guys, you know the kind they claim to want. Meanwhile the guys who are more aggressive and careless are the ones who tend to better pass their screens. So their own behavior tends to screen out the kind of men they claim to want and rewards the 'jerks' that they're always complaining about but somehow they just keep ending up with them.

This is a generalization, but generally speaking, the more confident a man is (and that doesn't necessarily mean he is a jerk) the more likely it is that women will be attracted to him. By definition a "jerk" or "bad boy" is extremely confident and that is what attracts women. However, I think that women rarely choose those guys as long-term partners. But yes, many women find confidence in men very attractive.

I think, however, that a man who is "quietly confident"--confident but also a gentleman, courteous, polite, considerate--is infinitely more attractive to most women.

 

[Kading]

By the way, talking about creeps:
I was with a girl at a salsa party tonight and she said if I remembered person X. After a while I remembered him and she said that he basicaly sits out the whole night and tries to dance with her whenever she is finished with another dance. She obviously gives her the creeps.
I do not know the guy but he looks pretty well socially awkward, so he's probably not even doing it on purpose. He just wants to dance with her and contact with her since he probably likes her, but yeah. She's obviously not interested in such a needy guy (last sentence are her own words).

I personally do not see those guys as creeps, though I can completely understand why girls find him creepy.
People that I find creeps are people who are not real and pretend to be someone they are not, manipulating others to get there way. People who pretend to be nice, but are after other things they are not telling you. People who you must second guess and you know when they talk to you there is always an hidden agenda.

 

[tripleg]

Lol, that's all you have to say to what I wrote? "Feminist man-hatred"? How disappointing. I thought we were discussing evolutionary biology not "ideologies".

FYI: I love men -- and I just nullified your "argument".

I try to limit "forum participation" aka arguing on the internet, but Okay, I'll bite... hard.

 

[Sabrosura]

I try to limit "forum participation" aka arguing on the internet, but Okay, I'll bite... hard.

It's not "arguing", it's a discussion. If I wasn't interested in what you (and others) think I wouldn't engage in it.

 

[Sabrosura]

I do not know the guy but he looks pretty well socially awkward, so he's probably not even doing it on purpose. He just wants to dance with her and contact with her since he probably likes her, but yeah. She's obviously not interested in such a needy guy (last sentence are her own words).

Leaving his social awkwardness aside, her perception of him as "needy" is a vicious circle. If she found him attractive, she would love the fact that he only has eyes for her and it could turn into dating/a relationship. But she doesn't find him attractive so his behavior looks needy and she finds herself looking down on him, so he appears even less attractive than in the beginning, and so on.

It's the same with women who cling so much onto men they've just started dating, text them 10 times a day, etc., until they start looking "desperate" and needy so the guys want nothing to do with them after a while.

 

[tripleg]

I sense judgment/bitterness/misunderstanding of women in what you wrote.

1) Your sense is wrong. So much for female intuitiveness in this case :/
2) If it were right it is an issue entirely separate from my argument.

Sorry, but men are also biologically wired -- to like a challenge.

Proof please. Proof that men prefer women who hide and fake interest. I don't know if that's what you mean by being a challenge, but that's what we're discussing.

If a woman is physically attracted to a man and sleeps with him immediately, thus reciprocating his interest, what does the man label her as, consciously or subconsciously?

You know there are other ways to unambiguously let a man know that you're interested besides sleeping with him. But hey whatever works

Definitely *not* girlfriend material, which won't stop the average man from going ahead and enjoy that one night stand with her and then never calling her again.

I have formed long-term relationships with girls I slept very quickly with. Two of my married friends started off as friends with benefits with their respective spouse. It's not really an issue with most guys so long as they like you and being with you is better than not being with you. Unless they are particularly religious.

Whereas a woman who is clearly happy with herself and confident about who she is and appears to not "need" a man and therefore is selective, is the one men will want to have and be around, because she clearly has "high value". Men have been wired to compete with other men for social status, resources, and women, and want to feel that they're "winning", whether they admit it or not; so a woman that has such low confidence and self-esteem that she just hands herself to them on a plate before she has a chance to "evaluate" their qualities is not what will make them feel like they're "winners", even if they will go for the one night stand or hook-up. You can deny this all you want, but that's the reality and it's not going to change any time soon.

The women who are happy and confident are the best to deal. In my experience they are actually more likely to sleep with me quickly because when they're interested they don't worry much about anyone's judgements. And when not interested they tend to be more clear and unambiguous about it rather than fake interest in order to garner attention as the insecure women do. Insecure women crave attention and validation.

The way to let a man know that he is winning is to make it easy for him. In fact women already do this. They throw themselves at rock-stars, star athletes, U.S. presidents etc. The harder a woman makes it for you, the more it is a signal that you're losing and for the losers the price of admission is higher.

And, you are comparing social interactions like not showing interest with murder and rape?! In a way *everything* we do is governed by selfish biological impulses that are then controlled and refined, to a degree, by our higher consciousness, but there is a difference between a woman or man's various interactions with a potential partner, and rape or murder.

NO NO NO NO.... I am not comparing coyness with murder. I am saying that you cannot justify something on the grounds that it is biological for precisely the reason you point out: everything (including murder and rape) can be said to be biological. The reason for mentioning rape and murder was to point out what ridiculous things can be justified by saying that it is "biological." You are making it sound like I'm saying that women's coyness is as bad as murder or rape. STOP THAT.