“He makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up” - warning signs you have observed

[AnyOldPrion]

Thanks to the Relationships board, I now have a better understanding of the red flags that can occur early in a relationship that indicate risk.

But it crossed my mind earlier that sometimes there are men (and possibly women) who set off instincts that make us feel unsafe.

Please don’t mention any names, or specific people, but what signs have you noticed that might consciously or subconsciously have triggered that response?

I’m personally not good at this, but I will try to start with a couple of things. These are things that happen when I’m in the same space as someone, but sometimes I have that reaction to photographs or recordings and I’m not sure why. I’d love to be able to understand what it is I’m picking up on.

Standing a little too close and/or moving towards me when I have moved away.

Being watched/stared at/eyes wandering.

Not backing off when asked.

Thanks in advance to anyone more observant.

I read a research paper some years ago that pondered the question of whether gender (it meant biological sex) played a part in the accuracy of interpreting non-verbal cues. It concluded it did but not in ways you might think. Men tended to pick up positive NVCs far more quickly and readily than negative ones. Women did the opposite - but their readings of ambiguous cues were more accurate.

Thanks, kesstrel, that's helpful. The major issue would be raising it with the parents. Not an easy thing to do.

He's always been violent - when very young it was overt biting, gouging, hitting - as he's got older it's done more subtly, but with that horrible smirk.

Yes, the smirk, and the satisfied look when he "won." It troubles me to no end, wondering if there was something I could have done to get him to see there are better ways of interacting. I just don't want to believe that there's nothing that can be done, or that for his type, that is the best way of interacting. I don't know if I should have said/should say anything to his parents. I hate that there isn't more social investment in guidance for children.

As for signs that trigger responses for me in adults, I feel a certain coldness from some men that puts me on guard, especially if they speak contemptuously or dismissively of others for no apparent reason. I was raised with three creepy, somewhat violent, pervy older brothers. When I got out of high school I spent years hitchhiking around as a vagrant, (sometimes doing jobs for a while). That has given me some perspective on this, to say the least- for example, one rule that I had was that a fellow who put me on edge took an unexpected turn, jump out while the car was turning. It's actually easier than you'd think, I thank my considerable luck that I never encountered a child lock in that situation.
While knowing that luck has as much as anything else to do with it, ironically enough, (or not) having hitchhiked alone in various countries, men having had goes at me, (hitchhiking or not) the only times I ended up getting raped were when I was with a (well-intentioned) guy and listened to him instead of my gut.

How to teach this to the young ones? TRUST YOUR GUT
So simple, so hard to get across...

After my family and school experiences, the creepy types I sometimes encountered didn't strike me as unusual. I was surprised after leaving home to discover that there are many women who didn't have the same kinds of experiences. (I still hitchhike now once and again, but no one has bothered me since I've been menopausal). Actually, it wasn't much different from being around men at work or whatever. Or walking down deserted streets. But since they didn't expect to meet me ever again, and having no shared acquaintances, a lot of them opened up to me. Most of the men I met that way were very decent, interesting, and sometimes amazing blokes. Some of them seemed glad to have someone to talk about their troubles to, or their interests. (I developed some bad ass listening skills, for which I was richly rewarded- if only I had a photographic memory!) But of course, some of them weren't afraid to show me their sleezy sides. As a hitchhiker, I noticed that my mood affected the type men who were more likely to stop, and, surprise, if I was down or weary, the creepy ones were more likely to. (It was a bit rare to get a lift from a woman, much less so now that I'm older).

Once I was walking with my backpack (it was more of a bundle, really) in,
maybe it was Bradford, somewhere around there, (early 80's, still in my teens I think) and a friendly ?Pakistani? guy started talking with me. He invited me to his nearby house for a smoke, where we chatted. He truly seemed like a genuinely nice guy. Then other guys started appearing. I can remember suddenly noticing how one was giving me "that look" and getting scared. I can't remember how many were in the room before I was estimating how difficult it would be to jump out through the nearby front room bay window glass. I excused myself and got out with no trouble. For decades I occasionally wondered what that was all about, until I found Mumsnet...

There is massive confirmation bias in this whole thread. We tend to remember the times we have been right, and forget the ones where we have been wrong. We probably meet hundreds of people who give us the creeps over the course of a lifetime, maybe thousands, and only in a handful of cases will we later learn something about them to justify that feeling - but those are the ones we remember.

I agree with trusting your instincts when you feel threatened - it's not worth the risk, even if you are wrong. Women particularly should never be afraid to be rude if they feel at risk. But it is dangerous to rely on instincts. In the course of my work, I have met hundreds of abusers and a famous serial killer. I'd say that 80-90% of them were totally unremarkable, non-creepy and in some cases, quite charismatic, though in an ordinary way, not a Hannibal Lecter charming psychopath way.

So I think trusting your instincts is the wrong message for girls/women. The message should be - sadly - be wary of everyone, even people you find likeable, until you know them really well.

I'm not at all comfortable with Autism and being a psychopath being conflated on this thread.

Autistic people sometimes harm others because they lack theory of mind and because their sensory issues lead them to lash out at times. This is generally far beyond their conscious control.

Psychopaths on the other hand have a highly developed, often over-developed theory of mind - that's what makes them often seem charming, attentive and convincing. However because they have a total absence of affective empathy, seriously harming or even killing someone is as little bother to them as making themselves a sandwich. They fully understand the harm they've caused to others and often they're quite proud of themselves. They. Just. Don't. Care.

I'm not at all comfortable with Autism and being a psychopath being conflated on this thread

Agree. And this is another example of the limitations of trusting your instincts. When we say people give us the creeps, we often mean that they are not obeying behavioural norms - for example, standing too closely to us, making too much or too little eye contact etc. But those behavioural norms vary massively between cultures and are also difficult for people with autism to learn.

Serial abusers and killers wouldn't be successful if they put people on their guard when first meeting them.

Sociopaths and psychopaths are born. However, not all of them turn into violent criminals and serial killers- the path they take is usually determined by nurture. Nature gives people the tools, nurture teaches how to use them.

Hmm not sure about this - look at that slightly odd teacher who got pinned for the poor girl in Bristol’s murder because he had funny hair and was abit eccentric. My godmother had a dog walking friend turned out to be Dennis Nielsen. She found him to be a pleasant chap.

I'm sure Dennis Nielsen was an absolute peach to your godmother. That's because your godmother wasn't Nielsen's type- he murdered young men who he was sure wouldn't be missed.

Interesting to read here that those who were abused in childhood can be better at noticing/reading micro expressions. It took me a long time as an adult to learn those things as I had a wonderful, protected childhood that sadly left me very open to abuse. Though oddly, only in relationships, not one-off attacks

Gavid DeBecker, who wrote The Gift of Fear, talks often about how his abusive and chaotic upbringing made him an expert in predicting how and when violence would happen. His book is absolutely fascinating. I read it once a year to remind myself of his lessons.

Interesting that previous posters have talked about children they have a bad feeling about. There's one I know through my circle of friends who makes me very uneasy. Superficially charming, manipulative, and violent when he thinks no one is looking. He came over for a play date with my own kids (first time I'd met him as I'd made friends with his mum and our children are similar ages) and he ended up terrorising my DD when they went to play upstairs on their own. He will never be welcome back.

But there are a lot of contradictions on your post, BeardedVulture.

If having been in abusive environments makes us better at identifying risks, why do so many serial predators - like Nielsen and the Wests successfully prey on vulnerable people? It isn't just because vulnerable people are so desperate that they take any risk - a number of runaways and other vulnerable women survived meeting the Wests and reported that they seemed fine at first. And those women weren't destitute - they went willingly to the Wests' house. But, if the theory that marginalised people can pick up better on danger is true, those women should have picked up on the threat straightaway and run a mile.

I'm sure Dennis Nielsen was an absolute peach to your godmother. That's because your godmother wasn't Nielsen's type- he murdered young men who he was sure wouldn't be missed I don't understand this. Nielsen wouldn't want to come across as creepy to precisely the men he was planning to kill. Quite the opposite - he'd want to appear normal to them, so that he could lure them home, and not care whether he came across as creepy to random dog walkers.

There is a massive amount of woo on this thread. We all like to believe that we can spot people who are threats, because it makes us feel safer, but the reality is that we usually can't. And pretending that we can can be a subtle form of victim-blaming, as well as a dangerous self-deception. The reason that most rape victims are raped by acquaintances is not that they failed to pick up on signs that the rapist was giving off, but because there weren't any signs because most rapists are no different from other man.

If having been in abusive environments makes us better at identifying risks, why do so many serial predators - like Nielsen and the Wests successfully prey on vulnerable people? It isn't just because vulnerable people are so desperate that they take any risk -

Being vulnerable and having grown up in an abusive environment are not necessarily the same thing.

Psychopaths frequently target people who are too trusting and nice.

Also , does the author of that book claim that growing up in a seriously abusive environment makes everyone good at spotting abusers, or just that it made him so? Because how people respond to that situation depends very much on their underlying personalities.

I'm not at all comfortable with Autism and being a psychopath being conflated on this thread

I hope my comment doesn't read that way. It was just a fact about that particular boy. I worked with a number of autistic kids at that preschool, and he was the only one that struck me as having any dangerous qualities. It was very interesting to see the positive effect that learning to interact with them had on their schoolmates. I think society is very much screwing itself over by trying to squish autistic kids into the box instead of finding ways to support them in pursuing their talents and interests. Well, that goes for all kids but...

Women and girls can be wary and not trust men until we get to know them AND trust our instincts. Not sure why anyone would think the message of this thread is "yeah so your instincts are a magic forcefield, if someone doesn't immediately trip your creep radar feel free to disregard caution completely".

I'm not at all comfortable with Autism and being a psychopath being conflated on this thread

I went to a talk run by a psychology professor about psychopathy and someone asked specifically about the differences between autism and psychopathy.

Her answer was really interesting. I can't remember exactly what she said, as there was a lot of detail but the gist was that someone with autism might not necessarily understand what they've done to upset someone, but will care that they have, whereas a psychopath will know why a person is upset but won't care.

Also , does the author of that book claim that growing up in a seriously abusive environment makes everyone good at spotting abusers, or just that it made him so? Because how people respond to that situation depends very much on their underlying personalities.

DeBecker absolutely didn't claim it be true of everyone who had an abusive upbringing, but that it was true of him- he became very good at identifying the little stepstones that led to a violent incident in his family home.

I don't understand this. Nielsen wouldn't want to come across as creepy to precisely the men he was planning to kill. Quite the opposite - he'd want to appear normal to them, so that he could lure them home, and not care whether he came across as creepy to random dog walkers.

IMO what is 'creepy' is things like staring, asking too many personal questions of a stranger, or inappropriate questions, undressing you with his eyes, standing too close, following you, forced teaming... none of which a serial killer who targets gay men is going to do with an adult woman because he is not interested in her as a victim. I'm sure there were plenty of men who found Nielsen unsettling and creepy, and rebuffed his offers to go back to his house. But a lot of unfortunate men did go home with him because they were drunk, or desperate (some of his victims were homeless) or because they didn't see him as a threat in the same way a woman might- men don't usually have a lifetime of being treated as sexual prey to draw upon and might not have spotted the warning signs.

This is a really interesting subject. I've known two men who were jailed for sexual assaults on children. One of them set off all my spidey senses and I absolutely couldn't bear to be around him.

The other one was a prolific child sex abuser, so prolific that his crimes were headline national news. He was a client of the company I worked for and we all found him pleasant and likeable. The only thing I wonder is that the person I did find intensely creepy abused a girl, whereas the second person who didn't give off any unusual signals to any of us (all female) abused boys. Is there something about sensing someone who might be a danger to your own sex?

There is a massive amount of woo on this thread. We all like to believe that we can spot people who are threats, because it makes us feel safer, but the reality is that we usually can't.

It's not all woo, though. There's some good evidence - from proper, empirical studies - that most people can pick out aggressive individuals from nonverbal cues (such as can be seen by watching a person walk towards a camera). Not everyone is good at it, and it's difficult to articulate what makes one person seem threatening and another not, but nonetheless people can do it far better than chance.

I think that some people have the point backwards. Nobody's claiming that you can ALWAYS identify EVERY man who wants to harm you. But even if you can only identify a subset of such men, or if your internal alarm triggers a lot of false alarms, it's still a skill worth developing.

Even if you run away from 9 harmless creepy man for every 1 dangerous creepy man, that's still one dangerous situation you have avoided. Even if you successfully clock one dangerous man and miss two others, that's still a 33% reduction of risk.

I’m very anti “woo” but as PP says, since the only real downside of trying to get away from people who give us the creeps is appearing rude to them, that’s OK!

I once met a pedophile who had violently abused dozens of children and yeah, he was adorable. He was modest and charming. He was the sort of person you would trust with your children. Sadly, that experience taught me to trust nobody. Especially not charming men.

I think the ones who come across a bit creepy and pervy and set off your senses are just that.

The real deal dangerous ones can be rich/charming/popular like the corporate psychopath theory. They really can pull off a good show without anyone noticing.

@Thegullfromhull your post has also really resonated with me, because something I used to really notice about my ex was that he had an unusual walk. Perhaps in real contrast to this thread, I actually used to find it quite attractive, and I'm trying very hard now to picture whether his palms faced backwards or not but I think they may well have! I know that it seemed to me his arms were almost slightly too long on his body (but not freakishly so!) and I think that's because of the way he held his hands so that could be it. The walk was quite dominant.

I once met a pedophile who had violently abused dozens of children and yeah, he was adorable I was groomed by one who was a pillar of the community and well liked and respected. My dm was suspicious of him and warned me to be wary, but grooming is incredibly insidious. Like a pp it only slowly dawned on me in recent years that I had been and I still have a vague fondness for him. I can see now how he pushed boundaries, and yeah, the forced teaming. My dm has her own reasons for being wary, and I definitely agree that experience brings a heightened sensitivity to that intangible something and I’m very grateful to her because she planted just enough doubt to give me the courage to be able to break away from him. There was another older woman in the youth group he operated in who, I think now, was keeping a wary eye on him. Telling my df wasn’t an option because he’d either not believe me or he’d kill him.

I vaguely remember a statistic about the percentage of CEOs and MDs who score high on sociopathic personality traits being very high.

Has anyone seen The Push (Derren Brown)? Different scenario but interesting on the tactics used to break down the persons inhibitions and resistance.

Dead or Alive by Geoff Thompson is a very good read too.

The real deal dangerous ones can be rich/charming/popular like the corporate psychopath theory. They really can pull off a good show without anyone noticing.

You know, based on my experience a lot of people DO notice those. I had one as a boss, he was extremely successful at his sales job but literally everyone in the office knew there was something extremely off about him.

I think part of it may have been that he was American and he had honed his scripts and strategies perfectly for other Americans. But his OTT compliments and carefully timed displays of emotional vulnerability were culturally completely "off" for the British and European offices, so there would often be these moments where you could see the wheels turning when his "charm" hadn't landed and he didn't know what to do next. So the cultural aspect probably made him a lot easier to spot. Plus he worked remotely, so office gossip spread easier about him.

I would say watch out for lavish compliments, and watch out for spontaneous confessions that seem to expect reciprocation. He also had an occasional habit, which I personally didn't experience, of saying weirdly innuendo-like, highly sexualised phrases - I remember something about 'double fisting' -- and acting totally innocent and confused when he was mocked for it. The people who saw that all thought he genuinely had no idea what he was saying but i don't know, he was definitely a creepy pervert (I did experience that) so it seems highly unlikely that it wasn't some kind of bizarre creepy-pervert game.

Thinking of recent experiences with colleagues, there was one who was a sexual predator. I wouldn't be his target demographic, and I always thought he had dead eyes. I worked with him for about 4 years, and we barely exchanged words. He also had a habit of looking over your head, into the distance. Watching him trying to engage his victims was interesting- there was a certain tone and enunciation that made him sound like he was acting.

My other colleague is a raging misogynist, and I have been the victim of a sustained campaign of harassment from him. I've always suspected he is a domestic abuser. Anyway, he also had poor eye contact, and when he did, it was with contempt and in an appraising way. He had a funny habit of tilting his head and his eyes would dart from side to side. You could actually almost see the cogs turning as he tried to hatch his plans.

I’m very anti “woo” but as PP says, since the only real downside of trying to get away from people who give us the creeps is appearing rude to them, that’s OK!

Of course that's ok - as I said in my earlier posts.

But the 'trust your instincts' message is dangerous because people tell themselves they can spot wrong'uns. They (usually) can't. And, if you do find someone creepy, you are immediately on your guard. The people who are a real threat are the ones you like, who seem totally normal, and who mean you harm.

this has reminded me about a man a came across professionally - I was actually very impressed with him, a man who worked with pre schoolers, because he had a very straightforward, reespectful way of interacting with small children- nothng cutesy or patronising. Anyway, turned out he had a load of child abuse images on his computer. 'Not the worst kind' the police said. So my instincts were definitely out there.

It takes time to learn to pay attention to the minutia in the information flow that makes up what we call instinct.
DeBecker and some other abused children learn it early, the hard way. Law enforcement agencies provide training in it.
We are too distracted most of the time to notice that minutia. In my experience the people who claim they can spot a wrong'un are few and far between, and usually arrogant men.

I would never claim that I can always spot a wrong un and I'm always right, I also have no instances where I've been proved right or wrong. I just tried to explain earlier on here how I feel when I'm uncomfortable around someone. I'm very articulate in person but I find it difficult sometimes to get my meaning across in print.
As I said earlier I grew up with an extremely abusive mother so I learned early on that watching and analysing a persons body language was a good thing to do. It's second nature to me now, that doesn't mean that I'll always be able to recognise an abusive person and I'll never be taken in.
If you've ever seen The Terminator films. When he gets the print out about the enemy that's what it's like in my head. Rapid fire information that bypasses any normal means of communication.
It's not woo and it's not nice to live with.
Shit, that definitely sounds woo to me.
As I said earlier, they just look wrong, they're fake, they're trying too hard, they're not real, they're totally false.
If I was a dog my hackles would be totally raised. That's what the making the hair stand up is all about.
I'm only an expert in my reactions, after all I've had 60 odd years to hone them. So I'm just speaking for me.