Creepy Creepers and the Creeps Who Excuse Them

Pic gakked from paulocoelhoblog.com.             Creepy, huh.

Today, my friends, we are going to talk about some particularly heinous sexism, of the “It’s okay for men to be creeps because genetics make it so they can’t help being creeps” variety. What sparked this? A blog entry I read earlier today. Here’s a delightful little nugget:

“So ladies, next time some lecher is staring at your breasts instead of making eye contact, don’t get indignant; he can’t help himself. It’s in his genes, and he just wants to share them with you. It’s evolution.” – Evolution, the Visual Ape

Read the post if you want. You’ll be treated to x-rays, photos of oranges, mushrooms shaped like mammary glands, and particularly offensively, the idea that men just can’t help it when it comes to reining in their baser instincts.

Well, I call bullshit. You know who thinks it’s okay to stare at a woman’s breasts because he’s aroused in the midst of a conversation?

A creeper.

You know who thinks it’s okay to tell women that wanting to spread his progeny (i.e. make you have his babies) is justification for treating her with a lack of human respect?

A creeper. (Or maybe Todd Akin.)

You know who thinks it’s okay to belittle other men by saying, “Today, his [aggressive rapey creeper] progeny vastly outnumber those males who are aroused via the other senses, a group collectively referred to as “sensitive men.”?

A creeper.

A child in a man’s body.

Someone who thinks his desires – particularly his desires for sexual gratification – should be the top priority in every situation.

Now, let’s look at the other side of the coin. Here are the behaviors women endure because of Creepers who think the above are all just “part of evolution.”

“Because if I had to list every time a guy…

grabbed me, groped me, cornered me, pinched me, rubbed up against me, called me a “bitch,” a “whore,” a “cunt” (and I love it when they append “stuck-up” before the noun; as if that’s the insult), called me “opinionated” (’cause… women shouldn’t have one?), “confrontational,” “unladylike,” told me to shut the fuck up, told me I could never be good enough, that I was stupid, fat, ugly, that I “ought to make more effort in the looks department,” that I should wear clothes that “emphasize (my) assets,” that I “should have kids by now,” deferred to my male companion, spoke mostly to my male colleague, ignored me entirely or deigned to talk down to me, assumed I was incapable, assumed I couldn’t learn, treated me like I was deaf, or mute, or an idiot, or an object, catcalled or whistled at me, acted as if I were nothing but a disembodied pussy and tits, talked over me, shouted me down, looked past me, looked through me, tossed off a sneery “whatever,” took credit for my ideas, thought “no” meant “oh jeepers, shucks, I meant ‘go ahead’,” tried to infantilize me, tried to shame me

…seriously, y’all.  We would be here FOREVER.”

— Mere Smith on Everyday Sexism. (highly recommended post)

Now, maybe the author of Evolution: the Visual Ape thinks he’s being funny with his post about why he just can’t help being a Creeper. Some of his commenters seem to think that was his intention. I didn’t laugh. You know why?  Because everything he says in his post is justification for why some men think it’s okay to subject women to the behaviors Mere listed in hers.

And this guy isn’t just belittling women with his post. How about lines like: “Most women tolerate this reaction from their men, not because they believe the common refrain that it’s okay to look but not to touch, but because they have come to realize that there is no hope of altering this behavior. ”

Fuck that shit. Women tolerate this reaction from men (“theirs” or otherwise) because if we tried to fend it off 24/7 we’d have no time left to deal with the rest of our lives. Because we can either get into physical altercations and verbal arguments multiple times in a day, or we can shrug and say, “Fuck that, I have better shit to do.”

What’s more, I know plenty of men who don’t gawp at my cleavage every time I speak to them: smart, articulate, interesting, “sensitive,” manly, virile guys who know that the way to prove you’re a man doesn’t come down to sticking your dick in any hole within reaching distance, but by treating other people like human beings.

But no, this blogger says, men just can’t do that. He justifies visual lechery, normalizes it, saying it makes more sense than olfactory or aural stimulation because:

A female walking around in the hot African sun, covered with hair, unable to bathe properly because soap is still several millennia away, is not likely to smell like Channel (sic) No. 5. Have you ever seen chimpanzees in the zoo? They play with their feces? She probably smelled like L’ Air du Shit.”

“Unable to bathe properly.”
“Covered with hair.”
“Smelled like L’Air du Shit.”

Now women are chimpanzees?

Well, the writer of this blog is a creep. A creep trying to justify creepiness under the guise of bullshit pseudo-science that blends just enough jargon with just enough “layman’s anthropology” to put together a blog that excuses being a lechey creep.

If, that is, you’re a creeper.

17 responses to “Creepy Creepers and the Creeps Who Excuse Them

  1. I think that the blog was *intended* tongue-in-cheek but fell on a sour note for me. “Har har ladies, we can’t help it, it’s in our GENES” is a tired, old canard and I’m sick of it, even in an intended humorous sense.

    Blogger may have been going for a “Oh no, we’re perceived to be in power but we’re the helpless ones, see” turn of irony but it’s tiresome hearing about the burdens of living on top of the heap… What, it’s not enough that it’s a message I’m already inundated with 24-7?

    WTF, you know? – you already think you have a right to look, grab, own – now I have to laugh at it with you and be OK with it? Not funny, not subversive, not fresh. Came off stale, ‘splainy and gross.

  2. The irony is that these creepers who dress their creepology in evolutionary-psychology clothing seem to have a much lower opinion of men than the feminists they would call “man-haters” do. Men do have brains in their heads. They do have impulse control. And I refuse to infantilize half of the world’s population, or excuse antisocial behavior, by buying into some bullshit about how they are ruled by biological cave-man impulses.

    • Rachel / @girl_onthego

      Upvote and upvote again. We’re all able to respect our fellow planet-dwellers; this is just stubborn refusal. I’m really proud that I know men who are *so much more* than this lunkhead gives them credit for.

  3. One of my good friends from high school used to be a girl. Now, He is a man. One of the most shocking parts of his transformation, according to him, was once he started taking testosterone, his whole focus shifted. All he could think about was sex. He couldn’t carry on a conversation in the same manner. He couldn’t concentrate…sex just kept getting in the way. I suppose, in some ways, he’s a like a person who is blind all their lives that can suddenly see. The images simply don’t make sense because your mind doesn’t know how to process vision. The hope for men is the same, once they get used to the sex, sex, sex, they can eventually put it in the back of their mind.
    The difference between him and most men, is that he knows what it’s like to be a woman. He knows what creeps feel like, and he doesn’t want to make anyone feel that way.
    If you’ve ever read anything I’ve ever written, I hate creepy men, which pretty much makes my relationships with men pretty nonexistent. I have no idea why they think they should be able to say whatever they want to say, whenever they want to say it. And, I realize that THEY is a pretty broad term. But, it’s simply inexcusable to me. No one wants to hear about your sexual desires. Want to know why? Because then we’d have to think about your penis, and women don’t really like to think about penises.

  4. I’m sorry you missed the intended sarcasm of my post. It was an intentional misuse of the theory of evolution to form a ridiculous explanation for unreasonable behavior. It’s a form I use regularly on my blog: take some less than desirable behavior and poke fun of it by constructing an absurd rationalization. The post had an underlying self-depricating tone, maybe a little more subtle than some of my other posts, but my regular readers seemed to get the message. I’m honestly surprised that anyone would take that post seriously. It was a slap at men’s behavior, not a justification for it.

    • Rachel / @girl_onthego

      Joe – When you write something, particularly something on the internet, it has to stand on its own merits. As DeM says above: “Not funny, not subversive, not fresh. Came off stale, ‘splainy and gross.”

      • DeM’s comments were fair. She stated that the post was intended as tongue-in-cheek but panned it anyway. She’s entitled to her opinion and I have no problem with it. My complaint is that you mislead your readers into believing it was a serious post when clearly it was not. You made no mention that it was intended as humor. Anyone going on the attack, even on an internet blog, has the journalistic responsibility to make sure they do not misrepresent another’s words. Can you honestly tell me that you believed it was a serious post, or was it just a convenient straw man?

        • Rachel / @girl_onthego

          “Now, maybe the author of Evolution: the Visual Ape thinks he’s being funny with his post about why he just can’t help being a Creeper.”

          • Rachel / @girl_onthego

            I also provided a link to your post so that the audience could read it on their own and draw their own conclusions.

  5. As a long time reader of Joe’s work, I think his brand of humor is always eloquent and on point. His use of sarcasm and satire are notable to any who’ve read more than one of his posts.

    I should note that he had the fortitude to link your quite unflattering post on Twitter, where I found it. Though I disagree with your use of his post to make your point, I’m not prepared to eliminate the possibility that your post is satire and sarcasm in its own right.

    WG

  6. I’ve read Joe’s blog, “Living in Kellie’s World” (Kellie being his wife) in its entirety. Reading this particular post, I can understand how one could misconstrue it as you have. However, if you read the comments you will see comments from many men and women, who know Joe’s style of writing and sense of humor. Therefore, he received no criticism from us, “his” readers. I assure you we, “his” readers, are not cold-hearted, misogynistic people.

    If you took the time to read his blog you will find it peppered with posts highlighting his longtime marriage to Kellie and underscoring the power she holds over him in a self-depricating, humorous manner.

    I respectfully disagree with your perspective “it has to stand on its own merits”. A post on a blog is NOT a static article written for a website or a journalistic piece. A blog post is merely a snapshot of a blogger’s life, musings, thoughts, writings, etc. . . A blog is in constant evolution, if you will.

    And let’s face it, some posts and some blogs are better than others.

    I do hope your readers will take the time to explore more than this post on Joe’s blog. He has some absolutely hysterical reads. Just remember to bring along your sense of humor, because that is the spirit he writes in.

  7. Joe actually sent me here too. I will agree with previous posters who defended him and said he was being tongue-in-cheek. But they said it better than I can so I’ll just leave it at that.

    That being said, I agree with your sentiment that in general, CREEPERS ARE NOT OKAY. Especially office creepers. Ick. http://mayorgia.blogspot.com/2012/08/the-office-creeper-is-back.html

  8. Pingback: Happy New Year! Where I've been, and where I'm going in 2013. | I Wrote ThisI Wrote This

Leave a Reply