<p>Glamorization of a criminal is no different than glamorization of a non-criminal, except for the added excitement of doing something wrong. Not that glamorizing something wrong is the impetus for the glamorization itself, but it does add to its excitement. The more the excitement, the more the interest, and hence, what the media covers. In some cases, the individual may not be "interesting enough" without the added excitement.</p>

<p>A second factor is appreciation. Appreciating expertise in a specific field is closely related to our own involvement in that field. For example, while a person may watch the World Cup with interest, he might not fully appreciate the expert performance unless he has played the sport himself. The more he tries to become an expert himself, the more he would appreciate the actual experts. Similarly, the more he reads about a subject, the more he appreciates the experts in the field. (Pun intended.)</p>

<p>When a criminal takes an action, it is generally not random. Usually, there is a goal that most people can understand or there is a consistent set of actions along some line. People who have an appreciation of the goal or the subject, even if they "would never do it themselves", are led to an appreciation of the perpetrator as an expert in the field. If they have a latent desire to perpetrate the same action, but suppress the desire rather than sublimate it, they will identify with the perpetrator as well, or in extreme cases, see them as a form of secret hero, whether they realize it or not.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-07-17T12:31:27.263Z
2014-07-17T13:08:16.873Z
2014-07-17T13:08:16.873Z
please delete me
<p>Some murderers are glamorized by society while others labeled monsters.</p>

<p>In both cases, they can commit the same terrible crimes and cause the same amounts of pain - yet one can be romanticized the other not. </p>

<p>In extreme cases, some serial murders receive wedding proposals. </p>

<p>How does cognitive science classify this attraction? </p>

<p>Is it just based on the way the criminal looks? </p>

<p>Does physical attraction override reason even to this extent?</p>

<p>When is it ever considered a normal behavior and why?</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-12-11T13:21:55.150Z
Maybe attraction is related to violence-susceptibility of people.
huseyin tugrul buyukisik
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-12-11T14:10:58.510Z
If alternatives suck, then one can choose the monster. Just like a merchant joining to pirate ranks. Pirate ships' decks had more equality than non-pirate ships as I read(about golden age of piracy). Of yourse a merchant is dead if denies joining to pirates.
huseyin tugrul buyukisik
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-12-11T14:30:10.570Z
It is related to observation frame. Pirate for English navy, hero for French navy.(or vice versa)
huseyin tugrul buyukisik
<social-psychology><physical-attraction><forensic-psychology>
What makes some criminals glamorous to others?
Greg McNulty
# What makes some criminals glamorous to others?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2013-12-10)

Some murderers are glamorized by society while others labeled monsters.

In both cases, they can commit the same terrible crimes and cause the same amounts of pain - yet one can be romanticized the other not.

In extreme cases, some serial murders receive wedding proposals.

How does cognitive science classify this attraction?

Is it just based on the way the criminal looks?

Does physical attraction override reason even to this extent?

When is it ever considered a normal behavior and why?

**Tags:** social-psychology, physical-attraction, forensic-psychology

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Maybe attraction is related to violence-susceptibility of people.  
> **username_1**: If alternatives suck, then one can choose the monster. Just like a merchant joining to pirate ranks. Pirate ships' decks had more equality than non-pirate ships as I read(about golden age of piracy). Of yourse a merchant is dead if denies joining to pirates.  
> **username_1**: It is related to observation frame. Pirate for English navy, hero for French navy.(or vice versa)  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2014-07-17. Score: 2

Glamorization of a criminal is no different than glamorization of a non-criminal, except for the added excitement of doing something wrong. Not that glamorizing something wrong is the impetus for the glamorization itself, but it does add to its excitement. The more the excitement, the more the interest, and hence, what the media covers. In some cases, the individual may not be "interesting enough" without the added excitement.

A second factor is appreciation. Appreciating expertise in a specific field is closely related to our own involvement in that field. For example, while a person may watch the World Cup with interest, he might not fully appreciate the expert performance unless he has played the sport himself. The more he tries to become an expert himself, the more he would appreciate the actual experts. Similarly, the more he reads about a subject, the more he appreciates the experts in the field. (Pun intended.)

When a criminal takes an action, it is generally not random. Usually, there is a goal that most people can understand or there is a consistent set of actions along some line. People who have an appreciation of the goal or the subject, even if they "would never do it themselves", are led to an appreciation of the perpetrator as an expert in the field. If they have a latent desire to perpetrate the same action, but suppress the desire rather than sublimate it, they will identify with the perpetrator as well, or in extreme cases, see them as a form of secret hero, whether they realize it or not.


---

