Livre d'Or

Maybe it is; my own definition may ultimately boil down to that, I'm not sure yet. I've been trying to formally, er, formulate a definition of "creep shaming" -- at least what I mean by it when I use it -- and I'm not sure it's ready for prime time. Here's my alpha-version crack at it:

Creep shaming exists in parallel to slut shaming. Like slut shaming, it's a form of policing social behavior on sexual grounds by holding people under constant threat of being assigned a stigmatized identity. These stigmatized identities, where they stick, mark a person as unacceptable company, unworthy of inclusion in "polite society"; once so labeled, all that person's behavior is interpreted in light of the stigmatized identity such that they can do no right, and all behaviors are understood to be, circularly, evidence of both the crime and the sentence. Men to whom the label "creep" has gotten stuck are considered to be acting "creepy" when they engage in courtship behaviors identical to ones that are acceptable from men not so labeled, simply because they "are" "creeps" and all their courtship behaviors are interpreted as "creepy", axiomatically; further the fact they they behave "creepily" (engaging in otherwise normative sexual behavior, but while being a "creep") then is construed as further evidence that they are a "creep".

Which yes, may boil down to status. Though the issue isn't attraction, it's behavior: men of low status are supposed to be terribly, terribly attracted to high status women. (Status wouldn't be any fun if you didn't have anybody to lord it over, would it? :/) But they're supposed to know their place and never have the impertinence of pursuing superior women. The pangs of unrequited desire are their punishment for not conforming adequately to hegemonic masculinity to earn higher status; serves their lazy asses right for not growing up tall or not being born first or screwing around with poetry or cooking or telescopes.

Which is why I, personally, really, really, really wish we would stop using the term "creep" to describe sexual harassment and a wide range of other sexual (and non-sexual!) misconduct. It's like trying to discuss irresponsible female behavior around STDs while using the word "slut". Okay, one reason. There are others.

There are multiple category of problem here, and they're getting thrown in the same bucket labeled "creep", and that is producing more smoke than light:

1) There really are "socially awkward" people -- more accurately, individuals with social behavioral deficits or social behavioral flaws -- who make mistakes. I think these people are more prone to get creep shamed when they transgress, ironically and unfortunately: the real predators manage to evade the label more successfully, precisely because of their social adroitness.

3) There really are predators -- people who are looking for victims, who enjoy victimizing others in a range of severities from ruining someone's day to killing people. These people have excellent social skills, if you're meeting them at any event in a hotel. That's how they get away with it. They know what they're doing, they know it's wrong, they know why it's wrong, and they like doing it because it's wrong.

2) In between those two is the really problematic case: people who enjoy dismaying others, who really don't see what's so wrong with it -- especially or exclusively if the other is a woman, and thus (they don't realize of themselves) not as much a person. They see groping a woman's breast or bodily picking her up and carrying her against her will as on a par with tying a string around a cat's tail or pretending to throw a ball to a dog. They think it's adorable to confuse, frustrate, frighten, or thwart a smaller creature than themselves toward which they feel fondly and which they think is cute.