Somebody acknowledging the harmfulness of the current "Aspy" diagnosis craze. I've seen kids labelled with that who are probably just going through an awkward stage, or have been a bit too sheltered and thus are bad at navigating social currents, or simply talk louder than others might feel comfortable with. Much like the ADD craze of the 90's, the current fad will end up branding kids who don't deserve it, probably caging them in a mindset of failure or "sickness" that may keep them from becoming who they might be, or simply being comfortable with who they are. It's sad how quick people are to stick kids in boxes these days. Remember liking yourself for yourself, no matter what? When did that become a liability, I wonder?

And let's not forget that those supposed "symptoms" often go hand in hand with higher intelligence, a capacity for lateral thinking, and a talent for imagination and creativity. "Nerds" often, perhaps usually, grow up to be the scientists, engineers, innovators. The pretty people are often the ones who coast along on looks (see all the brainless bimboes the media stalks and trumpets as the be-all and end-all to young girls), while the awkward, unpretty ones often have the most brains. Which would you rather have?

I say if a kid is odd, let him be odd. There's nothing in the slightest bit wrong with being strange. If the world were filled with people who were all the same, how boring it would be. Give me a kid with glasses, a knack for puzzles and a head full of odd, interesting questions any day!

As a lifelong nerd (I write software tuned for use by scientists on supercomputers) who still occasionally plays Dungeons and Dragons, I think I have some credibility on this topic. I think the author's hierarchy thesis fails to capture what is really at the root.

The author states:

But in general most of the people we consider nerds are people who are oblivious to or incompetent at following the hierarchies.

That statement is easily refuted, nerds are excellent at observing and following hierarchies in the abstract. This is why they gravitate to meritocracies and play intricate games. Debate clubs, Chess clubs, and the SCA are all about rank and hierarchy.

It is in hierarchies whose primary components are not abstract where nerds are incompetent. When hierarchical power is gained by physical or social manipulative prowess, then those with less ability are clearly revealed.

The socially awkward nerd is especially ill equipped to climb popularity hierarchies. These are fundamentally driven by the ability to emotionally manipulate, and thereby dominate, others in person in real time (coming up with the blistering reply to a lunchtime putdown while the way home on the bus is too late to be effective). Nerds, especially young ones, do not understand how to combine complements, abuse, displays of respect, dominance behaviors, and displays of aggression to prevail in purely social hierarchies. The beautiful people have at least minimally mastered self presentation, which gives them a leg up to master other social skills.

Failing at these hierarchies the nerd is either attracted by, or driven by desperation into, hierarchies where they can achieve status by pure intellectual effort. Like any social hierarchy there are both physical and emotional aspects to nerdy clubs, but they are not the determinant aspects.

I'm sorry, but I take exception at the idea of nerds not being adept at negotiating hierarchy. One needs these skills to know that an ancient red dragon is far tougher than an ancient blue dragon, and furthermore that one needs to bring one's ring of fire resistance along for the former (and not the latter). Also, that while a five-headed regular hydra is no great shakes, a twelve-headed Lernean hydra is quite a different story.

Finally, your readers should be aware that my eighteenth-level Wood Elf ranger is waiting to take on any naysayers that might come my way. There will be two arrows of slaying aimed your way...

(But seriously, enjoyed the article!)

Nerds, especially young ones, do not understand how to combine complements, abuse, displays of respect, dominance behaviors, and displays of aggression to prevail in purely social hierarchies.

So THAT'S how it works. It might have been useful if someone could have described the world in those terms when I started junior high school. Things would have made more sense.

What an awful set of skills to have had to learn, though. No wonder I spent my teenage years lost in a book. Life made so much more sense there.

I don't know if the author saw this before or during the writing of his book, but it's one the finest posts I've ever read, and a really compelling argument that explains why nerds struggle so much:

http://www.paulgraham.com/nerds.html

And for those who need some convincing, here are some quotes:

"In the schools I went to, being smart just didn't matter much. Kids didn't admire it or despise it. All other things being equal, they would have preferred to be on the smart side of average rather than the dumb side, but intelligence counted far less than, say, physical appearance, charisma, or athletic ability."

and

"Nerds don't realize this. They don't realize that it takes work to be popular. In general, people outside some very demanding field don't realize the extent to which success depends on constant (though often unconscious) effort. For example, most people seem to consider the ability to draw as some kind of innate quality, like being tall. In fact, most people who "can draw" like drawing, and have spent many hours doing it; that's why they're good at it. Likewise, popular isn't just something you are or you aren't, but something you make yourself."

Yeah, I'm a nerd. Back in the dark ages when I was in high school, I felt incredibly isolated because I knew very few other people who looked at life the same way I did. Nowdays, I can easily find them on the Internet. There are a plethora of web sites and online communities where we can find other people who share our interests, whatever they may be. It has made life a lot less lonely for nerds around the globe.

A big part of being a nerd is being true to yourself on at least some level. When you're young, it's not just realizing that you don't fit in (for whatever reason). It's accepting it, deciding that you are going to go it alone, and not trying to conform beyond a certain amount of social camoflage. This is liberating, but it also exposes you to a lot of abuse. Life in middle school and high school can be miserable for nerds. Those are the years of peak conformity, where you are trapped in a concrete block human warehouse with a bunch of other inmates who have a lot of energy invested in maintaining their spot in the social heirarchy and view your disdain for it as a threat. It's why adult nerds hate the "suits" (managers, HR, executives, etc.). They represent social rather than meritocratic heirarchies, they remind nerds of the people who tortured them when they were young, and nerds (occasionally rightly) often view them as ruining the companies where they work.

As for empathy or lack thereof among nerds, being a nerd gave me a visceral understanding of what it's like to be an outsider, to be judged harshly for stuff that just didn't matter in the grand scheme of things, to be discriminated against and put down. This has colored my beliefs, politics, and interactions with others ever since.