They met at a bar in midtown Manhattan. He arrived wearing a baseball cap pulled low and sported a pair of black-framed glasses, she says. As conversation flowed, from discussions about navigating life in New York to past relationships, he mentioned that his glasses were Meta Ray-Bans.
“I wasn’t familiar with them,” McAnuff, a 28-year-old project manager who now lives in Toronto, tells WIRED. It was her first time seeing the smart glasses up close, which can record images and video from the wearer’s viewpoint. He let her try them on and even showed her a couple of videos that he’d taken previously, she says. “That was it. We stopped talking about it after that. I figured that was the end of the use.”
The next day, checking her Instagram, McAnuff noticed she’d been tagged in one of his story posts. To her surprise, it was footage of them at the bar and on the subway together, en route to a basketball game uptown. In the video, McAnuff is captured from an above angle, sitting across from her date who is holding a drinking glass; WIRED has seen screenshots of the footage. “I felt super violated,” McAnuff says. “Like, what if I don’t want everyone knowing what I’m up to? He felt so free to film me and post it. There was no conversation about it.”
Meta sold more than 7 million pairs of the Ray-Bans in 2025, as its smart glasses have infiltrated public spaces thanks to pranksters with dreams of viral fame, some of whom even film people while they’re at work. The phenomenon, which has also spread to pickup artists hitting on women, has earned the hardware the nickname “creep glasses.”
Among singles, and particularly women, Meta’s AI-powered eyewear has become a recurring nuisance, as people share a spreading unease about being covertly filmed on dates.



If there were a lot of cases where women were murdering people after eating cereal, no, it would not be strange to see an article talking about the prevalence and the why behind the phenomenon.
Does it examine why men are doing it, and women arent? I didn’t see that. There is one line about reviewing the “game tape” looking to improve, but that’s all I noticed.
That’s the part. That’s all I saw about why.
The rest is about how recording people without their consent is bad, and these glasses make it easy…
The article is very upfront about what it contains - anecdotal stories from people who have been filmed while on dates. They all are women that were filmed by men.
“Anecdotal stories from people who have been filmed while on dates” would have been a better title.
It’s literally the subtitle.
“As anxieties over surveillance tech grow, unsuspecting singles are sharing stories of being covertly filmed on dates by Meta smart glasses.”
That’s literally the subtitle. And it would work just as well with better the title you wrote.
Yeah I quoted the literal subtitle in my comment:
Yes and guess the type of person who is overwhelmingly abusing the glasses and recording without people’s consent. Take a wild guess.
Malmoits? Those dogs are crazy smart and have far to much energy.
Men and boys.
This one talks about teen boys using these smart glasses to record girls in their middle and high schools
Does this one talk about Wired’s choice if title?
This one’s title is “Teen Boys Are Using Meta Glasses to Harass and Bully Girls at High Schools and Middle Schools”
That’s a better title. It’s directly mentioning a specific thing. It’s not moralizing that thing, or implying anything about it.
But men who wear smart glasses on dates are a red flag. That is a truthful statement.
It absolutely is. No denying that. As truthful for men as it is for Malamuts.
Here’s another article talking about the prevalence of men using these glasses to secretly record women.
Sure. But another article has nothing to do with the title of the Wired article.
Here’s another one, this time from BBC:
Still doesn’t mean anything to Wired’s title.
It’s backing up the Wired’s title by showing that is predominantly men who are using these glasses to film women without their consent.
But men doing it more often isn’t the problem with Wired’s title. It’s that Wired’s title implies it’s only a problem when men do it. Or more specifically, only a problem when men do it with Meta’s glasses.
Men who wear smart glasses on dates are a red flag.
I really don’t know why you’re so confused by that statement.
This article is part of a larger conversation about smart glasses, privacy concerns, and how people are using them.
Sure. I have no problem with the article or larger public conversation. The title is sensationalized with sexism, and a fad device. Which is what I tried to spark this conversation about.
It’s not sensationalized when it’s the truth. Men who wear these smart glasses on dates are a red flag.
Here’s another article, this one is from 404 Media:
It’s only sensationalizing when it’s the truth. If it’s not the truth it’s lying. And that a whole different thing.
Do you contest that the majority of people abusing these smart glasses are men?