4 ms·

Culturally there are two main groups: 1. Popular or "cool" people. Anyone who is not "book smart". 2. Nerds, geeks, etc. People considered to be smart. There

Culturally there are two main groups: 1. Popular or "cool" people. Anyone who is not "book smart". 2. Nerds, geeks, etc. People considered to be smart. There are people who somehow manage to belong to both sides. But its very clear cut. Everything you do is defined by that. I don't know how it came about, but have noticed that it came to be during the early 20th century. If you look back at media from around after WW2 ended (late 40s and 50s) it starts to become used in movies and television. Popular people are into sports, cars, etc. Nerds are science types. I experienced both sides in high school. In my experience, the popular side was more concerned in having a good time than anything. They wanted the attention. The nerds were generally better people all around. Nicer when you got to know them. I was a nerd who did sports and somehow ended up in between. But then decided to go full "nerd". The right choice because those friendships have lasted.

dragonwriter 10y ago
> Culturally there are two main groups: Except, really, no. > 1. Popular or "cool" people. Anyone who is not "book smart". Except lots of people in this group are book smart, and even recognized as such by their peers in this group. It just isn't seen as dominating who they are. > 2. Nerds, geeks, etc. People considered to be smart. I would say that nerds, geeks, etc. as distinct from "popular" are defined more by perceived (from the "popular" perspective) overattachment to niche intellectual pursuits. There is a very loose correlation with perceived smarts here, but its quite possible to be perceived as geeky/nerdy without being perceived as smart, and vice versa. Also, you leave out (3) the very wide group of people who are neither particularly popular nor perceived as geeks/nerds.
- asimuvPR 10y ago
  Would you please expand this point: Also, you leave out (3) the very wide group of people who are neither particularly popular nor perceived as geeks/nerds.
- coldtea 10y ago
  >> Culturally there are two main groups: Except, really, no. Except you've missed the word "main".
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    By any reasonable definition where either #1 or #2 is a "main" group, #3 is a main group.
serge2k 10y ago
> There are people who somehow manage to belong to both sides. But its very clear cut. Everything you do is defined by that. If you live in a sitcom maybe.

dragonwriter 10y ago

> Culturally there are two main groups: Except, really, no. > 1. Popular or "cool" people. Anyone who is not "book smart". Except lots of people in this group are book smart, and even recognized as such by their peers in this group. It just isn't seen as dominating who they are. > 2. Nerds, geeks, etc. People considered to be smart. I would say that nerds, geeks, etc. as distinct from "popular" are defined more by perceived (from the "popular" perspective) overattachment to niche intellectual pursuits. There is a very loose correlation with perceived smarts here, but its quite possible to be perceived as geeky/nerdy without being perceived as smart, and vice versa. Also, you leave out (3) the very wide group of people who are neither particularly popular nor perceived as geeks/nerds.

asimuvPR 10y ago
Would you please expand this point: Also, you leave out (3) the very wide group of people who are neither particularly popular nor perceived as geeks/nerds.
coldtea 10y ago
>> Culturally there are two main groups: Except, really, no. Except you've missed the word "main".
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  By any reasonable definition where either #1 or #2 is a "main" group, #3 is a main group.

serge2k 10y ago

> There are people who somehow manage to belong to both sides. But its very clear cut. Everything you do is defined by that. If you live in a sitcom maybe.