Joanna Schroeder believes that comparing the word “slut” with the word “creep” is a false equivalence. But that doesn’t mean she thinks calling guys creeps is okay.
I’m a feminist. You all know that by now, right?
I refuse to stop calling myself a feminist, despite MRAs and feminists alike wishing I would drop that label.
Just because I disagree with a lot of the things that prominent feminists say, doesn’t mean I disagree with equality and with examining society with a focus on women. And despite some of the disgusting things being done in the name of feminism—whether it be the attack-mobs of Internet RadFems who have been actively trying to ruin the life of my friend Hugo Schwyzer, or the similar groups of feminists on the Internet who berate, belittle and demean men for voicing their feelings and concerns about equality and Men’s Rights issues—I still call myself a feminist. I believe I define my own feminism.
My feeling has always been that there is no reason for snark when simple dialogue would do the job. We don’t all have to agree. In fact we’re not ever all going to agree. But we need to respect one another.
That being said, I disagree with both the MRAs and the feminists when it comes to the word “creep”.
My aforementioned real-life friend Hugo Schwyzer wrote a piece for Jezebel about why men hate being called creepy. In trying to get to the root of why this insult is so much worse than any other that can be leveled at a man, he posits this:
…So if fear of the feminine is what gives male insults their power, why then is “creep” worse than “pussy?” The answer is that creep is the only insult that instantly centers women’s perceptions. To call a man a “pussy” is to make a comment about how his behavior appears; to call him “creepy” is to name how he makes women feel. If a man wants to disprove that he’s a “pussy,” all he has to do is act with sufficient macho swagger or courage to make the insult obviously inappropriate. But trying to disprove “creepy” involves trying to talk a woman out of an instinctual response to a potential threat, a much more difficult thing to do. Most men recognize (or eventually learn) that the harder they try to deny their creepiness, the creepier they appear.
I agree with Hugo on almost all of this. Especially the part where a guy who tries to talk a woman out of thinking he’s creepy makes him even more creepy. That doesn’t mean the guy is actually a bad guy, but it means he’s overstepping a boundary he should be respecting.
♦◊♦
What’s missing in this conversation is the understanding that the word “creep” keys into a way in which many men have felt deeply misunderstood and generalized. Not all men are creeps, not all are violent, not all are out just for sex. But in many ways, this is the brush with which we’ve painted masculinity. Not necessarily feminists, but society as a whole. Guys are so horny they’ll hump a fresh-baked pie. Men are so dangerous, they can’t be trusted with childcare. These assumptions go on and on. And while I do believe men need to understand that for some women these fears are rooted in reality, women and society need to see the ways in which men—especially those who struggle with social awkwardness—suffer under these assumptions.
We as a society, and as women, too easily jump to calling someone a creep without really thinking about what it implies. If you extrapolate it a bit, you’re telling a man that you’re afraid he’s going to rape you. Now, you may legitimately be afraid he’s going to rape you (and I believe our instincts about people should be trusted and we should keep away from people we get that sense from) but for all the guys we call creeps, we cannot possibly believe they all are out to sexually assault us.
We use the word to insult men because it works. It is hurtful. For a man who is sensitive to how people perceive him, it is the worst insult you can level at him. It is not to be taken lightly.
But MRAs, here’s what I think you’re missing: “Creep” and “Slut” are not on the same level, and to claim they are is to misunderstand what it means to be called a slut.
Think about it, what is a slut? It’s a woman with a sexual past, a whore, a woman with no sexual morality, a woman who will use sex indiscriminately, a woman who doesn’t value her body or her integrity. To some people, a slut is simply a woman who enjoys sex outside of marriage.
To many people, even people in authority, a slut is a woman who is asking to be raped.
The crime of sluttiness is not about behavior toward another individual. It isn’t about hurting another person or violating their space. It is about the value of the woman… Her value to herself, and her value to society as a sexual being.
More precisely, being a slut is about her lack of value. A slut is, in so many ways, lacking humanity. If she is asking to be raped, or somehow deserving of rape, she is not even human. She is a flesh-doll. As far as I know (correct me if I’m wrong) there is no insult in the English language that is equivalent to that for men. I’m not saying women have it worse, I simply want us to all be on the same page about what all of these words mean.
♦◊♦
So is being called a slut the same as being called a creep? No, a creep gets the name by doing something to somebody. By doing something that violates another person’s sense of security or physical space.
I’d like to be more precise with this equivalence and compare the word “creep” to the word “bitch.” Now, being a bitch is a specifically female thing, and it’s not a compliment. Strong women are often called bitches, just as strong men are often called assholes. But there is an element of the word “bitch” that is shameful. Like we can’t control our hormones, like the essence of our femaleness is inextricably linked to being animals; as if nature controls us. Like the moon and the tides may cause our hormones to swell and next thing you know a totally normal woman is no longer in control of herself and she’s become a bitch.
When you’re called a bitch, it’s implied that you have no control over yourself and you don’t care who you hurt.
When you’re called a creep, it’s implied that you have no control over yourself and you don’t care who you hurt.
The ultimate lesson here is that both “bitch” and “creep” serve important functions. As Hugo says, “No other word is as effective as describing when a man has crossed a woman’s boundary; no other word forces a man to reflect on how his behavior makes other people feel.”
I would say the same thing goes for the word “bitch.” Both words should cause the person being accused to stop for a moment and reflect upon what they’re doing, to ponder whom they’re hurting, and to think about how they may need to change their approach.
In turn, neither of these words should be used casually. They are powerful, gendered words. And as we know, words do hurt. Words can even kill, as we see with bullied teens all too often.
Ladies, calling a random guy you don’t like a creep does damage to him, it shames him. Consider for a moment, before you call someone a creep, whether he may actually just be shy or socially inexperienced. He may be doing his best in an unfamiliar situation. No need to wound someone who is taking a risk in talking to you.
That doesn’t mean you have to talk to someone just because he wants you to. You can clearly say, “You seem like a cool guy, but I’m not interested. I’m going to go back to talking to my friend (reading my book, checking my emails, etc) now. Have a good day.” Then turn away. If he persists after that, then maybe he is being a creep. Make your boundaries clear and stick with them.
And fellas, calling a woman a bitch does damage to her. It reduces her to something akin to a beast. You don’t have to put up with someone treating you unfairly, but instead of calling her a bitch, you can simply say, “I think this conversation isn’t going in a productive direction. Let’s talk later (or let’s not talk about this, or let’s not talk at all, etc).” And then walk away. If she persists after that, maybe she is being a bitch. You, too, need to make your boundaries clear and stick with them.
If we can come to a consensus to stop using these words, and replace them with words that are less gendered, less rich with painful social context, I think that’d be awesome. But we’d have to work together—feminists and MRAs, men and women. And until we’re ready to do that, we should perhaps all make an effort at choosing our words more carefully.
Image courtesy of Mykl Roventine
About Joanna Schroeder
Slut shaming of women is a thing but we down play the fact that its mainly female on female.
When women are sexually shaming men – virgin shaming, nice guy shaming, creep shaming, slug shaming, older man with younger woman shaming, genital shaming etc … its not a thing!
If anyone is interested in seeing research that shows the sexual double standard is a myth and men and women are equally viewed negatively for having many partners, cultural suppression of female sexuality is female instigated and that the perception of there being a double standard might be rooted in confirmation bias, go ahead and ask for links.
I’m asking!
Link Away!
Hello again Media hound!
Here you go, three along those lines
Four theories about cultural suppression of female sexuality are evaluated. Data are reviewed on cross-cultural differences in power and sex ratios, reactions to the sexual revolution, direct restraining influences on adolescent and adult female sexuality, double standard patterns of sexual morality, female genital surgery, legal and religious restrictions on sex, prostitution and pornography, and sexual deception. The view that men suppress female sexuality received hardly any support and is flatly contradicted by some findings. Instead, the evidence favors the view that women have worked to stifle each other’s sexuality because sex is a limited resource that women use to negotiate with men, and scarcity gives women an advantage. [1] http://www.femininebeauty.info/suppression.pdf
*Abstract:(full paper behind a pay wall)
In contemporary society it is widely believed that men are socially rewarded for sexual activity, whereas women are derogated for sexual activity. To determine whether a sexual double standard exists, both undergraduate (n = 144) and Internet (n = 8,080) participants evaluated experimental targets who were described as either male or female and as having a variable number of sexual partners. Targets were more likely to be derogated as the number of sexual partners increased, and this effect held for both male and female targets. These results suggest that, although people do evaluate others as a function of sexual activity, people do not necessarily hold men and women to different sexual standards. [1] http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/klu/sers/2005/00000052/F0020003/00001293
*Abstract
In contemporary Western societies it is widely believed that there is a sexual double stand.ard such that men are rewarded for sexual activity, whereas women are derogated for sexual activity. This pervasive belief may result in a confirmation bias such that people tend to notice information that confirms the double standard and fail to notice information that refutes it. Two studies were conducted to test this hypothesis. In both studies, participants read vignettes about a target man or a woman that contained an equal number of positive and negative comments regarding the target’s sexuality. Participants recalled more information consistent with the double standard than inconsistent with it.
[1] http://psych.nmsu.edu/faculty/marks/pubs/Marks2006.pdf
“This pervasive belief may result in a confirmation bias such that people tend to notice information that confirms the double standard and fail to notice information that refutes it.”
Hallelujah! P^)
Confirmation Bias at work! – and if you understand what is is, you have to be careful due to the double edged sword! P^)
Great links, Eoghan. Thanks.
You’re welcome.
EDIT.
I forgot paying for sex shaming, and not being able to get sex shaming on that list of ways that women use male targeted sexual shaming language. I’m sure there are more examples too …
Masturbation, calling a guy a jag off isn’t a good thing. At least it wasn’t when I was growing up.
Both the terms slut and creep are designed to shun and isolate. We’ve had slut walks, but I don’t think we’re quite ready for creep walks.
This fact alone should tell us all something of the weight of the label being applied. Slut devalues the female sexual pedestal, and is more often – in my experience – used by women on women. Creep is a more holistic tag which can encompass mannerisms, physical appearance, awkwardness, inappropriate and threatening behavior, low social status, dirty, homeless, mental disorder etc
Holding geography and social circles constant – once a slut always a slut – yet with maturity and time, the label can soften and be manipulated towards the less negative connotation. Creepiness can be an instance of behavior that does not necessarily have to be permanent, but if it does stick, there is little chance for resurrection. A creep does creepy things all the time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=w2M9aeMBV1w
“Creepiness can be an instance of behavior that does not necessarily have to be permanent, but if it does stick, there is little chance for resurrection. A creep does creepy things all the time.”
An interesting analysis – which I have heard to justify Hate Crime.
One persons creepiness in another persons Autism, Asperger’s, Tourette’s Syndrome, Narcolepsy…..etc, etc, etc.
Oddly I have never come across a case of a Woman with the same diversity being called creep!
Maybe the abuse of the word creep is very much a male issue to address? P^)
But to answer your question. Is creep shaming real? Yes it is. With to the stories told here it is pretty clear that women (and probably men too) do indeed use creep as a way to not describe being made uncomfortable but as a weapon to shame guys that don’t meet a the shamer’s expectations. The only trick is that since in this case it seems to be something mainly women engage in feminists have declared that it cannot possibly be used that way.
Maybe this is a by product of the desire to believe that women are somehow morally superior to men and would therefore never do such a thing?
And then of course there is the ever present “its all about teh wimminz” attitude.
The answer is that creep is the only insult that instantly centers women’s perceptions.
It sounds like he saying creep shaming doesn’t exist because a woman’s perceptions cannot be wrong.
“The answer is that creep is the only insult that instantly centers women’s perceptions.
It sounds like he saying creep shaming doesn’t exist because a woman’s perceptions cannot be wrong.”
It’s true – a woman’s perceptions can never be wrong – only a man’s perceptions of a woman’s perceptions that can be wrong – and getting it wrong is just creepy! P^)
To paraphrase ” The answer is that creep is the only insult that instantly stigmatises a man in all peoples perceptions.
It’s fascinating to do a Google frequency check for specific words. Creep gets odd, because of a character called Dr Creep who died Jan 2011 – and news stories about Mission Creep – but in general the use of the word creep has a base level usage with spikes – and the spikes correlate with the usage of the word pedophile/paedophile.
Interestingly – slut is in decline and has been since July 2010 – which is odd as the decline predates “Slut Walking” – and the decline has not been halted by the explosion of usage linked to Slut Walk/Slut-Walk/Slutwalk. It seems that Slut walk was not necessary and has even failed to halt the decline in the use of Slut online!
I found this fascinating take on Creep from CNN Living:
” How to avoid dating an abusive creep
The first thing anyone asks a battered woman is, “why did you put up with that?” Domestic violence is the only crime I can think of — well, besides rape — where the victim is treated as complicit in her own abuse.
This is why I rarely talk about my two-year relationship with a batterer. I wasn’t a housewife with no resources, I was a teenager and he was my first boyfriend. He beat me, raped me and stalked me.
http://articles.cnn.com/2009-03-10/living/tf.dating.abuser.dont_1_dating-batterer-potential-abuser?_s=PM:LIVING”
It goes into much detail – and yet fails to address the word creep, leaving readers to accept that Creep means Wife beater – Domestically abusive male – rapist even!
Just Google “creep abuse” and see what comes up! Maybe It’s all the fault of the Google programming that searches out words and semantic connections – but forgive me if I have to wonder if there is not some high level of validity to the views of and reports by men, that Creep is used in very negative ways that are about Violence, rapism, sexual abuse, spousal/partner abuse, pedophiles ….
But what would men know about perception – we have none – we keep being told that – so we must be wrong! P^)
As you soon as you mentioned Hugo was your friend and he had a hand in this article (sorta speak), I stopped reading.
MR Hugo, is a man-hater, he posts nothing but man hating drivel where ever he goes, he was the darling of feminists circles till his history of violence against women got out , then he became persa non grata (spelling?).
Joanna Said:
I love the fact that when an accusation is made it sticks. The accuser is free to do it (well under US law anyway) – and they know that a public accusation is dangerous, and people naturally seek to defend themselves. It’s called Social Psychology!
Call someone a liar in public and they will rebut the accusation – and yet others may wonder at why the accusation has been made. Social Psychology experimentation has shown that when an accusation is made, and even reiterated with strong emotion, onlookers will accept that the accusation has validity.
“When did you last beat your wife?” is recognised as a socially abusive question – it implies that wife beating has occurred. It is a well known example of Logical Fallacy and much discussed and used as a teaching aide in many areas of eduction.
“Creep”? Well, it is as bad as that veiled and false accusation of Wife Beating, disguised as a supposedly reasonable and rational question!
It is a social convention that people are trusted – and any social activity which involves accusation and negative attribution has very serious and have immediate results.
So, it stops being about someone being creepy and takes matters into the areas of Psychological/Social Manipulation and the Psychology of Abuse.
So, if a Woman tries to prove she is not a Slut – it’s verging on the impossible, and the more she tries the harder it gets. Slut Sticks!
A guy gets called Creep, Creepy ( meaning sexual predator and dangerous ) and the more he attempts to prove he is not the creepier he looks and is perceived. Creep Sticks!
“… he’s overstepping a boundary he should be respecting.”?
… and the woman who is attempting to prove her innocence – is she overstepping boundaries?
No she is not – and that is where this whole piece falls apart – it is built upon the logical fallacy that there is equivalence of boundaries and fails to address reality.
Is Slut Shaming real? YES!
Is Creep Shaming real? YES!
Do they share the same social and psychological dynamics? NO!
It’s the same as describing the taste of chicken with reference to a Banana!
Is there any possibility that the person issuing the accusation of “Creep” or “Slut” is abusing social boundaries and an innocent person – relying upon Social Conventions and Interpersonal Psychology to not be defensive but to be to aggressively abusive?
Of course, aggression is never seen as a female trait – it is supposedly only male!
It is odd that in the fields of Domestic Abuse, the survivors (regardless of sex, gender, sexuality) all report that Physical aggression/abuse was less of an issue than Psychological aggression/abuse – and yet it is also recognised that women are more likely to be Psychologically aggressive and abusive to compensate for lower physical power and body mass.
It is so wrong – male oversteps boundary – woman NO!
Such a poor grasp of the reality of the complexity of the real psychological dynamics. It just shows bias that is the driving force of so much discord.
Discursive Psychology does address the matters widely, but it is noted that whilst this discipline has wide reception and application in Europe, South America and Australasia, It is resisted in the USA where a more Cognitive and Quantitative school of Psychology still rules. Some look at quality – and others just look for quantity that leads to stats.
Some link the US bias against Discursive Psychology to the idea of “Freedom Of Speech” – First Amendment, as Discursive Psychology looks closely at the use of language and illuminates how such freedom can have a negative effect – and even be quite “deliberately” negative. As a result, in many countries there are now legal sanctions for “Hate Speech”, and yet there is no such protections in US law. Given the dominance of the USA in English Language usage via the net, it does lead to bias and even miscommunication – as well as Legal issues where someone in the US makes comment that is a criminal offence where it is received outside of the USA.
I have to often wonder if the use of Creep is not in fact “Fighting Words” and not protected under the US First Amendment. It can also be seen as Defamation and also not be protected … Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire is an interesting legal precedent that really does apply to modern Net Usage – even if it is a case from 70 years ago.
I have even been called Creep and had to deal with accusations of touching a particular woman’s arse – which was neither amusing or true. That some will set out to express power by any means is a social factor that comes from some very aberrant minds and personalities.
They have had one hell of a shock when I have pointed out that I’m G.A.Y. (Kinsey 6+) – and then even been called a G.A.Y. Creep in response. That has lead to a simple solution, the name caller has been ousted for Homophobia and kicked out of bars etc. – even police involved and individuals charged. On all of these occasions there has been a distinct power play and real attempts to abuse power – and that has been really creepy. Some have been very upset that I am more than adept in dealing with matters.
I do recall one amusing incident when the Police Attended – the woman was in a right emotional state, being supported in her ever so public emotional and verbal outburst by her companions – making repeated accusations that I had molested her. That so many passers by knew me and asked what was going on just made the situation worse, in the eyes of the supposed aggrieve party.
She, and her companions, were most upset and angry when the Police arrived, simply because The Police Officers greeted me by name, as in “Hello XXXXXX, what’s going on?”. I had been dealing with that police force for many years via the LGBT Policing Initiative, and worked very closely with all Police Officers on Hate Crime, Domestic Abuse, etc. I was very well known and worked closely with the Police at all levels.
Immediate accusations of Police Bias, collusion, sexism and worse followed – and it was gratifying to see that the training the police had received on dealing with false and malicious accusations paid off! Claims made that as a disabled man I had to be a Creep (Sexual Predator) – even a Paedophile – I was evidently asexual and could never get laid… who would see me as sexual (well I know quite a few) …. so it was natural for me to be touching up some unknown woman’s’ arse…. etc. etc. etc.
It was even funnier when some of the group started to claim that the Police Officers were evidently all G.A.Y. and part of some Pink Mafia! One Police officer even bowed when he was given a round of applause by passers by …. he was straight, but a central figure in the LGBT policing initiative, and a more fair minded and non homophobic guy you could not meet!
There was consternation when the Police pointed out that it did not matter what the sexuality of a Police Officer may be – Public Incitement of hatred was a criminal matter, and a breach of the peace was occurring.
It was even more interesting to see how, following the training they had received, the Police separated the “accuser” from a certain “supporter” – and how once the supporter was removed the pattern of language changed, the accusations lost coherence and the supposed “supporter” went from quietly winding up the accuser and other supporters to wanting to leave ASAP – even shifted to supporting the police. The “Supporter” was ever so worried when the Police were asking me if I wished to file report for Criminal Harassment and even Hate Crime, and if it should be against just one person or all of the people involved?
I, of course, co-operated fully with the police! The accusers were shocked that I knew police procedure so well – and even quoted the relevant legal statuses verbatim!
The “Supporter” was then seen asking for all of the ladies to leave and go home ASAP (such a change from the person with a Big Wooden Spoon to supposed peace maker) when the police started asking “Witnesses” for report, and all were clear as to who was abusing who and the dynamics being used. The arrival of additional police officers was seen as a real game changer.
As it was – all participants, including the ever so quiet supposed supporter (Jeckel and Hyde – Spoon user to peace maker) ended up with formal Police Cautions and fines – and the matters left on file, which means that should they commit any similar criminal act in future they would be tried in court for all cases – old and new. It was interesting to see different members of that group out socialising afterwards, and how one person in particular was not seen again. There was such a marked change in public conduct, it was classic.
But none of my experience would be applicable to the USA – simply because it’s predicated upon a Different legal system and very different social behaviours. In the US I would have had little to no protection – and the abuse would have been seen as of little to no significance.
It’s great to write in the middle of the road – but whilst the extreme sides are not acknowledged to exist it has little value.
Yes, there are men who are Verifiable Creeps and Rapists, just as there and Women who are verifiable Bitches and Rapists too! … and there are yet others who play with such issues for their own gratification, amusements and power – and use no labels themselves.
It just makes me wonder – who has the boundary issues, and why is it all too often that the boundary question is polarised in only one direction?
There is an old saying “Good Fences Make Good Neighbours” – but it has also been found that Joint ownership of the fences also promotes Good Neighbours. When you have one neighbour who owns the fence it all too often descends into a pattern of abuse. Some neighbours just seek power by any means to express control. Painting a fence with Offensive Images is relative – but if your neighbour is a committed Christian and you paint your fence with Satanic images…. it’s pretty clear that it’s not just a boundary issue, and abuse in many forms is at play!
” As Hugo says, “No other word is as effective as describing when a man has crossed a woman’s boundary; no other word forces a man to reflect on how his behavior makes other people feel.””
Odd how it’s all about how women feel, and women’s boundaries – and the assumption is that the woman is feeling degrade and not empowered by any Misuse of the word Creep as Power Language and deliberate abuse.
Men are abusive this way? – woman are abusive another way? – and the central issue of ABUSE just gets ignored as the Polarising Filters come out – and people demand that the fence is theirs and they have absolute control of all boundaries. So many operate in the perceptual gaps and dark spaces that arise from two polarising filters interfering with each other. Click Here to see a nice picture that illustrates the issue
It is said of The Law that hard cases make Bad Law – and that is very true. It also applies to social sciences and social opinions, which is why middle of the road is a poor way to drive change. You do have to address all the people on the highway – those who are considerate drivers, law abiding inside speed limits – as well as those who drive like a bat out of hell, and even the wrong way because they see no value to them in being a social animal, except where it allows them to manipulate and control others for personal gratification.
“The crime of sluttiness…”? I know of no legal precedent where someone being called a slut results in that person being criminalised.
On the other hand, I am very much aware of how the term “Creep” has lead to men being criminalised – how it has resulted in arrest, and even prosecution – and as they say “It’s Impossible To Prove A Negative”.
I have had to deal with that matter head on, more times than I care to consider.
I even know of cases where that term “Creep” used against disabled men has resulted in social isolation, stigmatisation, social predation and ultimately their deaths. A number of those cases feature heavily in the Literature on the subject of Hate Crime.
It’s one of those Social Convention things – NO-one would abuse a disabled person – so an accusation is seen as more valid….. and the consequences just roll on from there!
I even know of one case where a wheelchair using prostitute ( she serviced clients with a certain Paraphilia ), demanded that she be allowed to be called slut in public, as it was part of her business and marketing. It was seen as incorrect to call a disabled woman a slut due to very odd social attitudes towards disability. Certain members of the public called Police, Social Services and even Members of the UK Parliament asking that this poor disabled woman be detained for supposedly evident Mental Health problems. As they saw it, no woman, let alone a disabled woman, would demand to be allowed to be called a slut – she had to be mad, insane and certifiable under section 21 of the UK Mental Health Act.
“The crime of sluttiness…”? – one has to wonder why such emotive language has been applied – and yet not applied to Creepiness – where an accusation made in public can have real impact and does have a far higher risk of legal issues?
The crime of Sluttiness?
The crime of Creepiness?
The crime of Bitchiness?
The crime of ……. ?
Of the three – which is most Socially Dangerous? Slut, Bitch, Creep? Which one is most likely to result in a response from others, and even a physical altercation if the person so “Accused” defends the accusation on the spot?
Abuse Language is Power Language, and the two are all too often interchangeable – it’s function is to disfranchise one person or group and empower the other side. It also has the danger of allowing those who seek power to use the polarities and the dark spaces that result to manipulate and play their own games.
AS for the defence of Mr Schwyzer, I do find it odd (even comical) that this piece links him to the word Creep – even if the link is inadvertent!
It is not just Radfems who question his attitudes, conduct and self professed history – many in the field of Men’s Rights were the one’s questioning long before any RadFems – and quite a few feminists (of very mild flavour) who are not RadFem were asking the same questions concerning Mr S’s own writtings and views of himself and others long before some Bloggistas picked up the matter for some blogging notoriety.
Opportunism does not invalidate the concerns or the realities. In so many ways, the RadFems were late to the party. I have to wonder why they have been singled out?
I’m not Radfem, MRA, Feminist or Masculist, and I have been very clear is addressing Schwyzergate – and even mapping it out over time. I go on the evidence, not the hyperbole and other’s opinions. I even judge matters from the fails that predate any general Hubub across the net associated with Mr S’s own writings about his own history!
I have then mapped it against other factors and published words, even his own words. In my opinion, there has been no witch hunting and scapegoating – and it’s odd how one set of events and the activities of some are linked to Negative attitudes and conduct concerning issues raised by men’s rights activists – given that one of the people who wrote so disparagingly about men was Mr H Schwyzer. His negative writing concerning men was commented upon and challenged very openly here on GMP. He never did respond on the issues – but he did leave of his own accord citing fundamental differences of philosophy which he could not reconcile. There has been much discussion about matters and much evidence has been produced – but as some live by sound bite, they lack the capacity and interest to deal with a 7 course meal with all the dish needing to be digested.
It was odd how so many spoke so positively about Mr S, and how that changed so suddenly when his own words were read and then discussed. There have been so many single words applied by people to express their take on matters – but in so many ways, the reality is that single words fail to address the reality, and more detailed explanations have been required.
Odd how it all gets Polarised with shoot from the hip words – the Sound Bites – Creep, Bitch, Slut, MRA, Radfem – all words used to place individuals in a defensive posture, a power game with words that is well known and as old as the Hills!
When I see it being used and hear it, I always look at the dynamics involved – and when it comes to the words, I look at the person using them, but always keep a very close eye on others. I have noted over so many years and so many incidents that the person using the word all too often is acting out a power play – not to attack the person being branded with words – but to impress a puppet master who is quietly in the background pulling other’s strings and being very careful to make sure it’s not them in the firing line.
The Puppet Masters and manipulators are the real creeps – and they come in many forms, both male and female – rich and poor – literate and illiterate. A Lone person issuing Power Language in a social situation is one matter – but as soon as there is a group – a social or public context, I look to the one’s who are quietly pulling the strings and seeking to have power and anonymity at the same time!
“Is Creep-Shaming Real?”
You bet it is! The problem is that some attempt to equate it with other forms of shaming! That is silly and just shows how little some grasp as to the reality. It would be the same as attempting to prove equivalence between Religious shaming ( Some Hair Cutting in Ohio with some Amish ) with Rape Victim Blaming! There is no equivalence – and attempting to make them equivalent is either just plain lazy or deliberately foolish!
And I have to laugh at how infrequently “Creep-Shaming” has been used here on GMP, and the actual examples of people who have used it, and then run away. Ms Amanda Marcotte even tried it as a single word riposte before running for cover! It was both illuminating and even comical that someone who SCREAMS so loudly over Slut Shaming loves to Creep Shame under such gross double standards! My own views on the Flying Of False Colours is a matter of public record.
Maybe some would simply benefit themselves and others by addressing their own Internal Constitution – and removing their personal amendments to Fighting Words and the attitudes that underpin their self permitted use of them?
So again – “Is Creep-Shaming Real?” – You bet it is! It’s just that some seem to miss it when it occurs, and fail to grasp it’s nature, usage and even the perpetrators due to Gross Double Standards and Bias that really has to be addressed – along with false equivalence, which acts more as a Justification to allow shaming to be Graded and therefore made permissible by degree !
So as I have made clear, when I see any form of Creep-Shaming, I always look about to see not just who is using it, but even who is promoting it’s use, and how the whole dynamic is playing out!
Creepy aint it?
Calling a man a “creep” is far worse than calling a woman a “slut”
You don’t see men clamoring to have “Creep-Walks”…
As a few people have pointed out, Joanna is actually saying that comparing ‘creep’ to ‘slut’ doesn’t work because of the differences in the terms. So she’s comparing it to ‘bitch.’ Also, she’s not trying to say one is worse than the other…that actually doesn’t help the problem.
As for “slut-walks,” well the reason they have them is an attempt to take back the word. It happens with all sorts of derogatory words…often the worst ones are the ones that communities try to take back.
““Creep” and “Slut” are not on the same level, and to claim they are is to misunderstand what it means to be called a slut.”
With all due respect I think you missed the underlying message she was conveying about how “slut” is worse than “creep.” While I don’t think it helps the problem, I don’t think it’s accurate either. Call a girl a slut and call a guy a creep, see who gets ostracized more.
Although I think you have an interesting comment on how the worst words are the ones that communities try to take back, I don’t concur. While we could both look to racial slurs and see that this has happened, those aren’t the “worst words.” How about the word “rapist”? I don’t see anyone trying to take that word back, and you won’t see anyone trying to take back the word creep either. It’s because that is THE worst word you can call someone in today’s society. Slut is a pale shadow in comparison.
“With all due respect I think you missed the underlying message she was conveying about how “slut” is worse than “creep.” While I don’t think it helps the problem, I don’t think it’s accurate either. Call a girl a slut and call a guy a creep, see who gets ostracized more.”
It’s interesting to do a thought experiment and change a few words.
You are in a bar – a man calls a woman a slut. If you are male you are expected to agree that the word usage is wrong and the same applies to a female. Should a male not agree he gets called Creep – and a woman who does not agree gets called ??????
Now You are in a bar – a woman calls a man Creep. If you are male you are expected to agree that the word usage is CORRECT and the same applies to a female. Should a male not agree he gets called Creep – and a woman who does not agree gets called ??????
It’s odd how words get used and how people are expected to react to them! The words don;t just have meaning but also embedded social conventions and expectations.
If Creep was parallel to other words there would not be the odd power dynamics that exist with it’s usage – with the power dynamics so evidently polarised and only in one direction.
No one has tried to “reclaim” the word “rapist” because “rapist” for the most part remains a literal term that describes specific conduct, not an abstract pejorative like “slut” or “nigger.” You’re not going to see a bunch of proud, indignant rapists come together and celebrate defiantly their collective identity, shouting from the rooftops about the one trait for which society has unfairly demonized them.
*Sentence removed*
MOD EDIT: Please avoid attacking other commentators.
Heather writes:
“Also, she’s not trying to say one is worse than the other…that actually doesn’t help the problem.”
Are we reading the same article?
Per Joanna:
“More precisely, being a slut is about her lack of value. A slut is, in so many ways, lacking humanity. If she is asking to be raped, or somehow deserving of rape, she is not even human. She is a flesh-doll. As far as I know (correct me if I’m wrong) there is no insult in the English language that is equivalent to that for men.”
She absolutely was saying one was worse than the other.
Well first, she said “correct me if I’m wrong,” and second when she says equivalent I took that to mean, a word that means the same thing for men. Not that one was worse than the other, but that there was no word that had the same meaning but described males.
I understand the difference you are describing. However, the entire article is (to my mind) defending the insinuation not only that there is no word with identical meaning (with which to smear men), but there exists no other word AS BAD a smear to use on men.
It seems pretty up front and obvious to me.
Heather – Taking the section quoted by John, I can think of numerous phrases and idioms which in context communicate exactly the same meaning as Slut (defined by Joanna).
It may be because I’m a G.A.Y. man and so women will say things in-front of me (assuming that I share their point of view about men – which all too often I don’t) so here are some nouns, abstract nouns and general idioms ( including possessives ) that have the exact same function as the word slut – but about men!
1) He’s a “Stud Muffin”.
2) He’s “Mine”
3) Nice Piece Of Meat
4) He’s Mine Till Morning
5) Walking Dick ( Interesting double meaning ref Penis – but also meaning stupid – basically a male Bimbo)
6) Fresh Haggis (Scots – ref Unprocessed meat that will look good in a condom) – also “Haggisable”
7) Peachy ( ref posteria, US ass, fanny – nice cute and well presented bottom, muscular well rounded – generally accompanied with references to sinking finger nails into it and using it for leverage – increased level so penetration during Coitus).
8) Caffeine Free – meaning he can be kicked out of bed in the morning – no breakfast to be provided, saves shopping.
9) Gas Mask – ref to be used for Cunnilingus, to be placed in a position where the female genitalia are fitted to the face as if a gas mask. Also implies sexual dominance and aggression with female kneeling astride male and pressing down on face.
10) Drongo – instant noun chosen for one night out to be code word for male to be sexually used and aimed for. Usage “Pet Drongo” “Drongo meat” “Drongo for 10″ “Drongo Lollipop” ( ref oral sex) …and many more besides.
….and there are so many more!
Given the diversity and inventiveness of language – I can assure you from personal experience of dealing with far too many ladies on nights out – Slut does have it’s equivalents in both language and in the “Attitude” of those who are so inventive, alliterative and very clear in the language they use.
If they aren’t in the dictionary – it’s because the lexicographers are still playing catch up – and the sheer breadth of language is defying categorisation – other than the obvious sexual intent!
If ladies wish to claim they do not view sexual partners, and use language in equivalent forms, I may have to Quote Hamlet! It’s either that, or I know too many women who are atypically sexual and sexuallized in ways that are abnormal – relative to the general population. P^)
… and the best One I have ever heard was from a most sophisticated lady of genteel ways: “Swine before my pearls”.
I think more comparable words would be creep and crazy. Crazy like creep denotes something wrong/off with the person and is also used to dismiss a person in a social setting.
“The crime of sluttiness is not about behavior toward another individual.”
How can this be true? Is she not having sex with another individual? Or do you think sex is something that happens to women?
There is one difference between “slut” and “creep” that I didn’t see you mention. “Slut” does not build a stereotype that puts women at greater risk of incarceration. You don’t see women labeled “slut” being charged falsely with rape or with pedophilia.
Although the word creep is used far too easily, I don’t think it’s always _primarily_ meant to hurt someone. When one woman tells another that a man is a creep, it’s not necessarily because she is primarily interested in hurting him. In some cases it’s a sincere attempt to warn someone about a perceived danger or to commiserate with someone else. This is no excuse for tossing around a shame-filled word any old time you like.
That doesn’t mean the word isn’t painful, just that there may be very little overt malice in using the word. That’s part of the problem, which I think is one thing that SheSaid is trying to point out; being callous about words can be just as awful as being malicious with them. Let’s not read intention backwards from the effects – just because it’s hurtful doesn’t necessarily mean that being hurtful was the main motivation. They may not be out to hurt you – could be they don’t really think about how you feel at all.
On reclaiming labels:
I understand being uncomfortable with the idea of taking a slur and making it into a term of empowerment. It seems almost unavoidable in some cases, and it’s actually very common. There are long-ago and recent examples all around us. When the U.S. Constitution was drafted, many of the authors generally thought “democracy” as a nasty word, and “democrat” was a kind of insult. The word “chicano” used to be an insult, but now it’s a recognized subculture and an acceptable academic term. I have a colleague with a degree in Queer Studies. I don’t know how to tell him he shouldn’t use that official term when talking about his academic training. There’s still the United Negro College Fund and the N.A.A. Colored People.
Another perhaps minor difference between “creep” and “slut” is that if a man hears a woman labeled as a slut, he may actually find her more intriguing or compelling, depending on the person using that word. (“Really? A slut, you say? Hmm. Tell me more.”) Hope springs eternal, you might say. If someone whose opinion I don’t respect calls someone a slut, I would likely think more highly of the person accused, and would probably guess that the person accused has a healthy attitude towards sex. I’d think, “ah, this so-called slut is someone probably a lot like me.”
I doubt few women are intrigued when they hear a man labeled a creep. (“Really? A creep, you say? Hmm. Tell me more.”) Even if a woman had no respect for the person using the word “creep,” would that really make a big difference in how she saw the accused? I doubt she would think, “ah, he’s probably misunderstood because he has a healthy attitude, someone probably a lot like me.”
Another test of the difference would be to compare your reaction to hearing your sister labeled a “slut” and your brother labeled a “creep.” Would you be equally eager to defend each of them against those two different slurs? I wonder. Honestly, I’m not sure I would.
It’s a good question but it ignores the larger issue of protecting women and letting men fend for themselves. In this comparison the labels aren’t nearly as important as the people being labeled.
Sure – but you’re also injecting another meme variable into that test: vulnerable female and self-reliant bootstrapping male. Your test reaction would need to compensate for that lopsidedness.
I do agree with your point regarding overt malice. It needs to be considered for both words. We can’t communicate properly in glass houses.
When someone asks that question, the word ceases to be about how it makes the person against who it’s aimed feels, and more about how it makes the person related to the person against who it’s aimed feels. The notion of “family shaming” comes into play. In short, possessiveness becomes the issue. As Jimmy says, it also becomes about “protecting women,” which, in of itself, establishes an intrinsically sexist power differential. And people don’t generally run out defending their brothers against name calling unless they have a personal stake in not wanting to be related to someone associated with the name being volleyed. While this list comprises a string of homophobic slurs, it doesn’t include “creep.”
I just realised that finnish does not have an direct translation for the word creep in this context.
Interesting observation!
Is there any equivalent usage – with a direct translation!
It’s like the ongoing saga of “Rape Culture” which has no direct translation into other languages and has top be translated as “Culture of rape”, “Culture of Shame”, “Culture of dishonour”… and it all depends upon the social context of the county and cultural group!
In French the there is no direct translation fro creep – and multiple possible translations “effrayant” is one meaning scary!
It just shows how the English language word “Creep” is not just a word, but a Concept in a single word. It’s far more than the sum of it’s letters – and the same is true of Slut, Bitch etc.
So how would the concept of “Creep” be translated from Finnish to English? Is there an equivalent Context?
Sorta off topic, which is apparently where I’m living today, off topic…but yeah…it’s interesting what you’re saying about language. Really, that’s so very true of a large portion of the words and phrases we use. Even something as simple as the word ‘apple’ is actually partially a concept. The thought that usually springs to mind is a red delicious, but really we use the word to mean a bunch of different types. But just because in English the word ‘apple’ includes red and green apples, doesn’t mean that every other language will be the same. Another language could consider red apples and green apples completely separate words.
Language man, gotta love it.
Heather – I love language – we have been close lovers for many decades! It’s very intimate – and trilingual! Quite a Mouth full! P^)
All is fine as long and language behaves is a socially acceptable manner – and when it does not the stand up shouting matches and rows are legion!
…. but the making up afterwards is worth it all! P^)
As for Creep – glad you grasped that it’s not just a word but also carries a whole load of social baggage with it!
I remember one friend explaining this to someone who could not grasp the matter! They used the term Boyfriend to illustrate. In the US Boyfriend is all about romance, developing relationships, possible long term upto marriage…. it has a whole load of baggage that goes with it.
Now use the same word in a Moslem country – it just does not have the same meaning, and can even be dangerosue. It has a whole different level of baggage which comes from the society and context.
Some get lost in the social differences and talk focus upon what they see as social, national, religious views that they find unacceptable – and yet all they are doing is pushing their baggage attached to one word upon others!
Words have baggage and not just letters!
Any equivalent usage? Well you could use other words like weirdo, stalker, nutcase, crazy but there is no direct equivalent usage.
Maybe the question is why does the english language have such an word?
Safor – answering why the English Language has specific meaning attacked to creep would require a time machine to fully unravel. The earliest references I can find for “Creep” on line are in Shakespeare’s works (circa 1600) – where the word is used in many different ways – to move slowly (creeping like snail Unwillingly to school – Twelfth Night) – to be fawning and obsequious, even serpent like (Troilus and Cressida) …. and the reinvention of language goes on from there to the modern day.
If you go further back you get into Olde English (Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales Circa 1390) which is Saxon mixed with German – and there you have Creopan, creap, crupon, cropen and kruipen, kriechen, krjupa, krypa, krybe. and more … and all linked to the idea of reptiles, insects and slithery things! There are also intimations of vice and stealth. Creep seems to have been very negative for at least 700 years.
http://define.com/Creeping & http://www.dict.org/bin/Dict
From American Sources (West Cost – Boston and NY) 1914 – Creep meaning a sneak thief. Later West Coast circa 1950 ( Los Angelese – Holywood) “To advance, grow, or multiply inexorably. In hackish usage this verb has overtones of menace and silliness, evoking the creeping horrors of low-budget monster movies.
It just shows how a word is not just the sum of it’s letters but does come with baggage attached, and that is all too often Cultural Baggage.
For some creep will mean one thing – and as comes from USA 1914 – it also does have the overtones of criminality. Even back to the 14th century, before Columbus sailed the ocean blue, it has been linked to vice, stealth and base animality – dark things and night time terror.
By contrast – there is one word I love In Italian – “Simpatico” – It simply has no direct translation into English, or other languages.
“Simpatico” can be translated as nice, kind, charming, warm, friendly, kind hearted, sweat, endearing, congenial, empathetic, sympathetic …. and even more. Yet there is no direct translation from the Italian. It seems to exists as the antonym of “Machiavellian”(machiavellico in the original Italian) – and even “Machiavellian” needs so many words to describe it’s meaning.
I wonder why Creep gets used so often and Simpatico so infrequently? P^)
Hi Joanna,
Interesting article…thanks! Hate the word “creep”, personally.
I think “virgin loser” is probably closer to an equivalent. And like slut I’ve heard it applied most by the same gender.
Creep shaming… seems to me to be mostly a product of men being expected to make sexual advances more than women. If things were equal I’d imagine women would see this too.
I hate the word creep but I would not say it’s the male equivalent to slut-shaming. I’d say that by and large the male equivalent of slut-shaming is shaming someone because of their lack of sexual prowess. Slut shaming implies it is inherently linked to their sexual encounters, whereas creepiness is not. However, “virgin shaming” or “loser shaming” or whatever you want to call it is, and it exists, both to and from men and women. I’d say however, it is much more likely to be towards men, just like slut-shaming is more likely to be towards women, but nevertheless, the phrase “manwhore” is popular jargon.
I can offer my own experiences with the word creep as a bi-sexual woman. I have experienced feeling like I am a creep, or creepy. I still have problems being ok with my own sexuality, most of my family members are homophobic, and I am not open with them about my attraction to women. Sometimes when I notice my attraction to a woman, I have felt like something is inherently wrong with me. Growing up, this feeling of being a creep caused a lot of damage. I acted out often. I still occasionally get a sense of self loathing when I think of how others whom I care about would perceive my sexuality if they knew. I am blessed to have met other people who do accept me for who I really am. If I’m not careful in controlling my own eyes, and a straight woman notices the way I look at her with attraction, I can see the awkwardness I have caused her to feel, and I feel extra creepy. This isn’t only because I have caused her to be annoyed, but because of my sexuality and being fearful that she is weirded out by the fact that I’m a woman. So I can definitely empathize with feeling like a creep. I have felt knots in my stomach, as well as goose bumps from being disgusted with my own self. I even went through a period of self mutilation (cutting) in middle school as a result of self loathing in feeling like a creep.
I think that feeling like a creep was more of not accepting myself because there was a lot of bigotry towards homosexuality that I was exposed to growing up. My attraction to other boys and their attraction to me was accepted and even anticipated. My family was the type that thought you couldn’t trust leaving two teenagers of the opposite sex alone together.
For straight men, being attracted to women is accepted in society. If the woman doesn’t reciprocate or appreciate his attraction to her, he should accept that and move on. If a woman is creeped out by the way he goes about expressing that attraction, maybe he should change the way he does that, instead of trying to dodge the real issue. The real issue being that he is doing something that causes her to get a creep vibe from him, maybe through lying and manipulation because those are the kinds of come ons by men that make me think he is creepy. It could also be the way he is looking at her and objectifying her. This is why I said that thing about controlling your own eyes earlier. I think a lot of men can go brag about how he hit on a woman and it’s acceptable in our culture. If he is rejected he may get mad about that because he is losing face in terms of homosociality, and instead of changing his ways, he decides that he is being creep shamed.
I think that slut shaming is different in the way that society expects women to not be very sexually expressive at all, and usually if it is excepted, she is expressing the type of sexuality that is commonly believed to please a man, and not expressed for her own gratification. People have their own ideas of what a slut is. I’ve heard people call a woman a slut just because she was wearing a low cut top.
A lot to think about here, Jasmine.
Thanks for your insights.
When men concern themselves less with what women think of them, and more about what men think of them, creep will lose its sting. As a word it is a manipulation, a shaming tactic to cause the man so named by a woman to seek approval, to prove he is not creepy.
This creep won’t walk you to your car, help you with a heavy load or change your tyre for you on a lonely, dark stretch of road. The approval of women is over rated.
It is.
And more women are starting to say the same thing about the approval of men.
Relations between the sexes need to reach an extreme state of modernity before we can come to something like a sensible policy toward one another.
I think your indifference is a good start. It’s on the way to a return—maybe—to a tolerable code of conduct: classical manhood. In the classical period, our style of wounded obsession with the opinion of women would have been loathsome behavior for a man. A man’s relations with women were circumscribed by custom. He gave to the women in his life what he owed them in his social capacity as husband and father and no more.
His time among other men wasn’t spent brooding on injustices or slights from women. He talked about what was worth talking about: the best way to live; how to define it, how to pursue it.
Women, too, have us too much in their heads and in their way. They seek, I think, a separate sphere where they can pursue their own project, their understanding of the best way to live.
Modernity has gone as far as it can go, I think, in defiance of these strong tendencies toward separateness, toward a strict definition of appropriate behavior and relations between the sexes. Is anyone really in favor of where we are now? The demand for respect, from both sexes, may be fulfillable only with the proper distance.
I think you’ve hit on the only solution to the hostility between the sexes: rigorously maintained borders in the public sphere, respect and reserve in private.
Mike writes:
“It is.
And more women are starting to say the same thing about the approval of men.
Relations between the sexes need to reach an extreme state of modernity before we can come to something like a sensible policy toward one another.
I think your indifference is a good start. It’s on the way to a return—maybe—to a tolerable code of conduct: classical manhood. In the classical period, our style of wounded obsession with the opinion of women would have been loathsome behavior for a man.”
I’m not sure I agree with that. Look to victorian England in which men dueled with pistols or swords when a woman’s fidelity was questioned.
In my estimation woman have always been pedestalized and men always disposable. I prefer looking forward to new solutions rather than going backwards.
The word “Creep” is powerful, it’s telling the people who hear it that the man in question could be a potential threat.
While challenging her feeling and perception may seem wrong to some, the woman has labeled the man and made her labeling known to others.
The problem then is that the woman’s feelings and perception of the man holds weight in people’s minds, in their minds you’ve most of done something “wrong” to be labeled that.
Woman (and people in general) need to take responsiblity in how they talk about individuals to others.
I have been surprised, and also not surprised at all, by the way in which men reporting that specific language such as Creep is damaging has been received.
I have been looking for examples of sexual dimorphism in language and would recommend that disbelievers look at the work of The University of Bedford’s work in the area of Cyber Stalking – Bedford is the home of “The National Centre for Cyberstalking Research”. They have been running The Electronic Communication Harassment Observation (ECHO) since 2010. Full publication is awaited this year.
Their work with many organisations reveals much that is unrecognised and which has been historically and even hysterically dismissed.
There is a marked difference in the way men and women react to the same events. When there is Cyber Stalking, women on balance fear Physical Threat whilst men fear damage to and Loss of Reputation. That is not to say it is exclusive to one sex – but the statistical analysis of their work is very clear, and there are marked sex related differences – which also related to events and language and how it is used!
Fear and Distress is experienced by most people (in fact the rates of PTSD from Cyber Harrasment/Stalking are as high as 50% and sex neutral) and there is no significant difference in venues or modus operandi by stalker.
The findings on the Pilot Study of ECHO report:
Analysis of the ECHO Pilot Survey – 2011
Some will no doubt wish to argue that this just means that some men are Pussies and Whimps when it comes to such matters – but that reaction itself is indicative of the attitude that dismisses men’s own reported experiences as not valid.
It should be noted that the study is into behaviour that did not result in physical violence!
The report also shows marked differences in how men and women are treated when they are abused – Whilst there is a majority that do not receive support, more men than woman are treated negatively – and for those who do receive support women are twice as likely as men.
On a personal note – I am aware that when dealing with harassment/abuse, men are at a considerable disadvantage in having their experiences, and their knowledge of such experiences, taken seriously.
There is no bigger creep than a virgin at least 35 years of age.
Interesting definition of creep!
So people of religious views and practices are Creeps?
Disabled people who have not had access to partners, prostitutes and even sex surrogates are Creeps?
Do you have any feathers to go with that boiling pot of tar and the very big tar laden brush you swipe about with?
I have to say your views are Creepy – as well as ill-informed and juvenile!
I’ll see what MediaHound said and ask if this also includes people who simply have never been in a sexual situation (or at least extremely rarely) whether they are disabled or not?
And I’m also curious how you calculated the age of 35 for this? Are you trying to leave enough leeway so that the movie 40 Year Old Virgin is still funny and relevant?
Slut and Creep are equivalent in the following ways:
1) Both are a perjorative based upon behaviour – sluts have sex with “too many” partners, based upon the subjective view of the person using the term. Creeps make advances to women who do not welcome the advance, their “creepiness” is based upon the subjective view of the person using the term
2) Both terms are a slight upon the target’s reputation and attribute characteristics associated with the term with the target even if these attributes are not apparent. Sluts might be considered to also be: less intelligent, suffering STI’s, have poor hygiene to name a few. Creeps also have additional attributes associated with them; sexual deviancy, psychotic tendencies, physical weakness to name some. These additional assumptions make the named person less desirable as company, friends or romantic interests.
3) Neither term has an opposite that the target can use to demonstrate the falseness of the attribution to them. Once assigned it is an indefensible label.
I think men should reclaim Creep, after all if being a Slut is something to be proud of then Creep can be lionised as well.
There is a slight difference: Creepishness isn’t considered to be a positive trait in women, whereas sluttishness is considered to be masculine.
I agree promiscuity is perceived as masculine but not the other attendant aspects of the term “Slut”.