13 ms·

There's definitely been a move to demand individuals be good at everything... old stereotypes of the nerd brought a lot of negatives, but they were also apologe

There's definitely been a move to demand individuals be good at everything... old stereotypes of the nerd brought a lot of negatives, but they were also apologetic, acknowledging the trade off, that paying attention deeply to one thing does lead to being worse at other things. The exact stereotype differed by domain... the performer who is a diva, the self destructive author, the manic artist... each with a hint of nobility but also quite off-putting. The author wanting to combine Weird Nerd with autistic is very incorrect IMHO... I've known a lot of weird nerds, am one myself, and there's lots of different flavors, most of them not autistic. So much of talent is just really caring about something specific. Caring about it above other things. Specifically above external motivation and incentives. Do that and the weirdness grows naturally, neurodivergence isn't even necessary (though it might help)

jacobolus 2y ago
"Performer who is a diva" is not directly about focusing on one thing at the expense of another. Performers are trained to be divas by having no real friends willing to confront them, and by being infantilized by the people around them who lie about their faults, are excessively accommodating of bullshit, and don't ever make them take responsibility for mistakes or reflect on their impact on other people. The result is often the same for people in positions of authority, such as CEOs. Cf. Elon Musk.
- IggleSniggle 2y ago
  I somewhat agree, but I think there's more to it than that. To be a great performer, you have to care about delivering your own "message" as authentically or at least "in totality" more than anything else. Critique may be useful in understanding how your vision is being received, but actually delivering the vision requires believing in your own vision more than the visions of others. The same could be said of CEOs. It's not just that there are adoring fans / sycophants, it's that to be a great success in these areas you need to be able to disregard the criticisms of others when the criticism doesn't really connect with what you are trying to achieve.
  - jacobolus 2y ago
    The "diva" stereotype, starting with opera prima donnas, has plenty of real-world examples. These are people who were constantly pampered by support staff who treated them as royalty, and then ended up being huge jerks to anyone who even looked at them the wrong way. Lack of empathy and basic respect is not just about iconoclasm or compartmentalizing criticism or whatever.
    - pantalaimon 2y ago
      I don’t think Klaus Kinski was particularly pampered, he was still a legendary jerk and actor.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
makeitdouble 2y ago
The line you draw between "weirdness" and "neurodivergence" is interesting. Would neurodivergence have to be native (so, not grown "naturally") and at which point does weirdness fit on the spectrum ? Recently I think people are more receptive to lower degrees of neurodivergence. I see it the same way people understand that you have a gradation between having difficulties climbing stairs and not being able to walk. We could probably have it more in the open that many are not full blown clinically diagnosed ASD patients, and I wouldn't see it as an issue to have "false positives" of diversity lumped into neurodivergence if it was destigmatized.
- kristjansson 2y ago
  At some point the question is “why?”. We can keep atomizing human variability into smaller, more graduated buckets of neurodivergence, but what’s the point, esp. for those that don’t really suffer negative impacts, and for which there isn’t really any remedy besides acceptance?
  - belinder 2y ago
    Just a guess here - but to make diagnosed people feel more included and part of a group, the more people get diagnosed even if it's 0.01%, the more safe the others feel because they're not alone, it stops being a stigma
    - ambicapter 2y ago
      How does sifting people into smaller and smaller buckets work to make people feel more part of a group? Seems more like people who have felt marginalized in the past want others to feel marginalized like they did, and work to place people into smaller and smaller categories to do so.
      - licebmi__at__ 2y ago
        Because the buckets were always there and the main difference is their visibility.
walt_grata 2y ago
I duno on some of that. Until I was about 39 I was a "weird nerd" and then my wife (Dr of special education) finally convinced me to talk to a Dr and get get tested for autism. Turns out I'm ASD 1, would have been Asperger's in the past. Autism has a very wide range of ways it shows itself.
- sneed_chucker 2y ago
  Well, to me your comment also speaks to the increasing degree to which we medicalize personality traits. I'm sure your diagnosis is legitimate, but also I'm inferring from your comment that you are married and gainfully employed; so it sounds like you're able to build and maintain relationships, as well hold conversations with strangers or non-close acquaintances when necessary. In years past would any professional have bothered to test someone like you for a disorder?
  - faeriechangling 2y ago
    I don't really accept the validity of people who are generally more functional and conventionally successful than average being called "disordered" in the first place. It seems like a weird arbitrary insistence of the medical system to simply pathologize anybody who fits into a certain box.
    - tomrod 2y ago
      I'm glad you aren't a, diagnostician with that bias!
    - WereAllMadHere 2y ago
      What about someone who needs a wheelchair but is conveniently successful?
      - coffeebeqn 2y ago
        If they seemingly successfully have walked around their entire lives - sure. But this seems like a off analogy
_yb2s 2y ago
Caring about something deeply above external motivations, especially external validation is by itself neurodivergent. At the very least, you have to be highly introverted, which is rare.
- fdw 2y ago
  I'm understanding your statement to mean that caring about something because of itself, without external motivation (like validation or money), is neurodivergent. So neurotypical would be to only care about something if you profit from you caring about it? Is that reading correct? If so, I have to disagree vehemently. That is not my experience at all and feels extremely homo economicus and - to be honest - depressing. I want to care about things I like and that bring me joy, even if no-one pays me for that or validates my choice.
  - _yb2s 2y ago
    It sounds to me like you probably are introverted, but might not be familiar with exactly what that means, or how neurodivergent is really is from much more common extroverted people. Most extroverts aren't ruthless machivellian self interested people like you are worrying I am claiming, but they are focused primarily on fitting in and being accepted by others- and do choose their activities and behaviors mostly based on that. Their interests are genuine, but the biggest factor in them is usually who it connects them with, and how it makes them appear to others. What do your hobbies, car, clothing, etc. say about you and how will that affect how others see and treat you? Introverts are, as the name implies, more inwardly focused- and although they enjoy social connection and acceptance also, it can be exhausting and therefore less motivating, and generally takes a back seat to more inwardly generated concerns. It is often wrongly confused with being socially awkward or shy, which isn't the same at all.
    - andoando 2y ago
      I hate this extrovert vs introvert thing too. People don't fit simiply into these buckets.
pclmulqdq 2y ago
Mental illness is somewhat linked to creative productivity, sadly. Bipolar disorder is somewhat overrepresented in highly-accomplished musicians, artists, and writers (with the trend going as far back as the 1800s). It would not surprise me if ASD is overrepresented in scientists and engineers. However, people also imitate their tribe, and seeing "weird nerds" with mental illness may get other nerds to emulate that behavior without actually being mentally ill.
- throwthrowuknow 2y ago
  Pretty sure the weird nerds the article is talking about are not the type of people that are looking at their “tribe” trying to figure out what to imitate next in order to maintain or increase their social status. They’re Weird because they pay no attention to those fads and eschew social effort in favour of dedicating the largest portion of their time to their passion. They tend to be idiosyncratic in the extreme because they aren’t constantly synchronizing their behaviour with society at large. But maybe you’re right that there are people in science and engineering that put on those trappings as a way of blending in. I think the article is arguing that the balance of poseurs is increasing and that of the genuine article decreasing.
- fragmede 2y ago
  Or plain just getting away with shitty behavior. Uncle Rick's a raging asshole and we still accept him as part of the family, which means so can I.
  - seanmcdirmid 2y ago
    Usually people with an uncle Rick don’t want to become like him and are actually more self aware.
    - koolba 2y ago
      Except (young?) people are idiots and mistakenly think the bad behavior is the source of the genius rather than just hitching a ride.
shufflerofrocks 2y ago
>So much of talent is just really caring about something specific. Caring about it above other things This is a really nice statement. Definitely agree with it. I've often seen so many fast-starters in many fields who just taper away, because the subject just isn't interesting to them, and it was the peeps who stayed in the field that ended up becoming really good at it. Definitely holds up the old "Average intelligence and persistence has accomplished much more than genius" quote
- paulpauper 2y ago
  You have to be good, and also care, which is like effort. a lot of young people care or put effort into playing sports but most do not have the talent to make a living at it. "Average intelligence and persistence has accomplished much more than genius" For hard problems, high IQ is necessary but still insufficient. You are not going to solve a hard math problem with average IQ no matter how much persistence you throw at it.
  - indigochill 2y ago
    > You are not going to solve a hard math problem with average IQ no matter how much persistence you throw at it. I'm inclined to disagree, but there's an important piece here that I've found when solving problems that were at least hard for me: sometimes I can get hung up on making a particular approach work when it's not going to and what I need to do is back up and find a different angle of attack. For example if you're solving a hard math problem with little math knowledge and average IQ, if you're really passionate and persistent about it, then you'd realize you first need to learn more math to build your understanding of the domain. IQ/persistence in this case is not really about the problem itself, but more about the problem-solving process itself.
red_admiral 2y ago
I think part of the problem with "autistic" is that, although there is an official diagnostic protocol for it, it's far from clear whether that cleaves reality at the joints, as the philosophers say. It's also still mostly an open question if and how autism in women might present differently from in men.
shrimp_emoji 2y ago
MBAs wanna justify less staff so everyone has to be good at and do more things now. :D Be a dev and tech support and business relations and...
galfarragem 2y ago
> I've known a lot of weird nerds, am one myself I suspect most of us here are... At least in some degree.
CalRobert 2y ago
This bizarre romanticization of autism is frustrating for those who are or have loved ones who are nonverbal, stim all day, etc.. I almost wonder if nerfing autism to the point where it's a fun thing to talk about having on tiktok is a way to demonize effective interventions so insurance companies won't have to pay for them.
- imbnwa 2y ago
  Actual Obsessive Compulsive Disorder is a crippling pathology
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- esskay 2y ago
  It's been a similar pattern with ADHD, it feels like its almost been turned into a trend. Although that being said we've had a number of people at our place been diagnosed with ADHD, Autism and in some cases both, all developers, all within the last 3-5 years, and you know what, they're absolutely correct diagnosis. It's a mix of romanticization and a change in acceptance and understanding of the two, and they do often go hand in hand as we've seen. But things like the tiktoks mentioning "My Ausistic brain" or "My ADHD brain" are a bit over the top and are making it feel like it's being treated as a 'cool thing' to have. For me personally I knew I had some sort of autism or ADHD decades ago. It was only when I started having massive issues focusing on work a couple of years back, combined with stimming and an increase in sensory issues that I decided it was time to investigate and sure enough, diagnosed with both. Out of the ~20 developers at my workplace a good 2/3 of them are either diagnosed with one or the other, or exhibit strong signals that would indicate they've likely got at very least ADHD.
  - rustyboy 2y ago
    as someone who spent a few years really addicted to stims but eventually got clean, when I started having problems at work with focus and attention, I decided that I didn't want to get diagnosed because - at some fundamental level - stims honestly feel like everyone should be on them. Like everything is better: studying, talking, moving... I've spent a lot of time trying to avoid things that challenge my attention span, mediating and journally, and trying really hard to use organizational tools/apps. With some pretty decent success. I really struggle with knowing when disorder is just code for anti-human (or anti-your personality) work.
davidthewatson 2y ago
> "The author wanting to combine Weird Nerd with autistic is very incorrect IMHO... I've known a lot of weird nerds, am one myself, and there's lots of different flavors, most of them not autistic." That makes one of us - no consensus required. Monotrope? AuDHD? Brenner's Lacanian "Way of Being"? Forensic accounting of which spectrum owns which symptoms is the new ultra-sport - winner take all. The thought that we wind up with yet another control vs. uncontrollable dichotomy of Stoicism worries me, at least in the West. Walk around an Amazon warehouse unannounced for an afternoon observing its transformation of surveillance capitalism into a set of funhouse mirrors where the observer cannot discern between observer and observed - an infinitely extensible Heisenbug. It's as if you took a page from the 1980's PC design playbook and decided that delightful beige was the architecture of the future - a kind of inorganic revenge of the techno-typicals.
- ab5tract 2y ago
  Can I ask you to explain how this is at all relevant to the clear statistical fact that not every weird nerd is autistic?
hiAndrewQuinn 2y ago
Passion and ambition are just not neuro-vanilla traits. I think that's what you're picking up on. Some people these days who are anything but call themselves autistic, ADHD, etc because they don't have a defensible banner anymore under which they can be passionate or ambitious without some reason behind the reason for it. The only way out is empathy - true empathy, a willingness to accept sometimes (often) people do things for the sheer joy of doing them.
- DavidPiper 2y ago
  > Passion and ambition are just not neuro-vanilla traits. Hard disagree, which I think is your point. I see this as an offshoot of anti-intellectualism: distaste for / absence of passion and ambition is cultural, not biological, and culture becomes self-sustaining. > The only way out is empathy - true empathy, a willingness to accept sometimes (often) people do things for the sheer joy of doing them. Strong agree, and it's wild to me that this has indeed become a radical idea.

jacobolus 2y ago

"Performer who is a diva" is not directly about focusing on one thing at the expense of another. Performers are trained to be divas by having no real friends willing to confront them, and by being infantilized by the people around them who lie about their faults, are excessively accommodating of bullshit, and don't ever make them take responsibility for mistakes or reflect on their impact on other people. The result is often the same for people in positions of authority, such as CEOs. Cf. Elon Musk.

IggleSniggle 2y ago
I somewhat agree, but I think there's more to it than that. To be a great performer, you have to care about delivering your own "message" as authentically or at least "in totality" more than anything else. Critique may be useful in understanding how your vision is being received, but actually delivering the vision requires believing in your own vision more than the visions of others. The same could be said of CEOs. It's not just that there are adoring fans / sycophants, it's that to be a great success in these areas you need to be able to disregard the criticisms of others when the criticism doesn't really connect with what you are trying to achieve.
- jacobolus 2y ago
  The "diva" stereotype, starting with opera prima donnas, has plenty of real-world examples. These are people who were constantly pampered by support staff who treated them as royalty, and then ended up being huge jerks to anyone who even looked at them the wrong way. Lack of empathy and basic respect is not just about iconoclasm or compartmentalizing criticism or whatever.
  - pantalaimon 2y ago
    I don’t think Klaus Kinski was particularly pampered, he was still a legendary jerk and actor.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]

makeitdouble 2y ago

The line you draw between "weirdness" and "neurodivergence" is interesting. Would neurodivergence have to be native (so, not grown "naturally") and at which point does weirdness fit on the spectrum ? Recently I think people are more receptive to lower degrees of neurodivergence. I see it the same way people understand that you have a gradation between having difficulties climbing stairs and not being able to walk. We could probably have it more in the open that many are not full blown clinically diagnosed ASD patients, and I wouldn't see it as an issue to have "false positives" of diversity lumped into neurodivergence if it was destigmatized.

kristjansson 2y ago
At some point the question is “why?”. We can keep atomizing human variability into smaller, more graduated buckets of neurodivergence, but what’s the point, esp. for those that don’t really suffer negative impacts, and for which there isn’t really any remedy besides acceptance?
- belinder 2y ago
  Just a guess here - but to make diagnosed people feel more included and part of a group, the more people get diagnosed even if it's 0.01%, the more safe the others feel because they're not alone, it stops being a stigma
  - ambicapter 2y ago
    How does sifting people into smaller and smaller buckets work to make people feel more part of a group? Seems more like people who have felt marginalized in the past want others to feel marginalized like they did, and work to place people into smaller and smaller categories to do so.
    - licebmi__at__ 2y ago
      Because the buckets were always there and the main difference is their visibility.

walt_grata 2y ago

I duno on some of that. Until I was about 39 I was a "weird nerd" and then my wife (Dr of special education) finally convinced me to talk to a Dr and get get tested for autism. Turns out I'm ASD 1, would have been Asperger's in the past. Autism has a very wide range of ways it shows itself.

sneed_chucker 2y ago
Well, to me your comment also speaks to the increasing degree to which we medicalize personality traits. I'm sure your diagnosis is legitimate, but also I'm inferring from your comment that you are married and gainfully employed; so it sounds like you're able to build and maintain relationships, as well hold conversations with strangers or non-close acquaintances when necessary. In years past would any professional have bothered to test someone like you for a disorder?
- faeriechangling 2y ago
  I don't really accept the validity of people who are generally more functional and conventionally successful than average being called "disordered" in the first place. It seems like a weird arbitrary insistence of the medical system to simply pathologize anybody who fits into a certain box.
  - tomrod 2y ago
    I'm glad you aren't a, diagnostician with that bias!
  - WereAllMadHere 2y ago
    What about someone who needs a wheelchair but is conveniently successful?
    - coffeebeqn 2y ago
      If they seemingly successfully have walked around their entire lives - sure. But this seems like a off analogy

_yb2s 2y ago

Caring about something deeply above external motivations, especially external validation is by itself neurodivergent. At the very least, you have to be highly introverted, which is rare.

fdw 2y ago
I'm understanding your statement to mean that caring about something because of itself, without external motivation (like validation or money), is neurodivergent. So neurotypical would be to only care about something if you profit from you caring about it? Is that reading correct? If so, I have to disagree vehemently. That is not my experience at all and feels extremely homo economicus and - to be honest - depressing. I want to care about things I like and that bring me joy, even if no-one pays me for that or validates my choice.
- _yb2s 2y ago
  It sounds to me like you probably are introverted, but might not be familiar with exactly what that means, or how neurodivergent is really is from much more common extroverted people. Most extroverts aren't ruthless machivellian self interested people like you are worrying I am claiming, but they are focused primarily on fitting in and being accepted by others- and do choose their activities and behaviors mostly based on that. Their interests are genuine, but the biggest factor in them is usually who it connects them with, and how it makes them appear to others. What do your hobbies, car, clothing, etc. say about you and how will that affect how others see and treat you? Introverts are, as the name implies, more inwardly focused- and although they enjoy social connection and acceptance also, it can be exhausting and therefore less motivating, and generally takes a back seat to more inwardly generated concerns. It is often wrongly confused with being socially awkward or shy, which isn't the same at all.
  - andoando 2y ago
    I hate this extrovert vs introvert thing too. People don't fit simiply into these buckets.

pclmulqdq 2y ago

Mental illness is somewhat linked to creative productivity, sadly. Bipolar disorder is somewhat overrepresented in highly-accomplished musicians, artists, and writers (with the trend going as far back as the 1800s). It would not surprise me if ASD is overrepresented in scientists and engineers. However, people also imitate their tribe, and seeing "weird nerds" with mental illness may get other nerds to emulate that behavior without actually being mentally ill.

throwthrowuknow 2y ago
Pretty sure the weird nerds the article is talking about are not the type of people that are looking at their “tribe” trying to figure out what to imitate next in order to maintain or increase their social status. They’re Weird because they pay no attention to those fads and eschew social effort in favour of dedicating the largest portion of their time to their passion. They tend to be idiosyncratic in the extreme because they aren’t constantly synchronizing their behaviour with society at large. But maybe you’re right that there are people in science and engineering that put on those trappings as a way of blending in. I think the article is arguing that the balance of poseurs is increasing and that of the genuine article decreasing.
fragmede 2y ago
Or plain just getting away with shitty behavior. Uncle Rick's a raging asshole and we still accept him as part of the family, which means so can I.
- seanmcdirmid 2y ago
  Usually people with an uncle Rick don’t want to become like him and are actually more self aware.
  - koolba 2y ago
    Except (young?) people are idiots and mistakenly think the bad behavior is the source of the genius rather than just hitching a ride.

shufflerofrocks 2y ago

>So much of talent is just really caring about something specific. Caring about it above other things This is a really nice statement. Definitely agree with it. I've often seen so many fast-starters in many fields who just taper away, because the subject just isn't interesting to them, and it was the peeps who stayed in the field that ended up becoming really good at it. Definitely holds up the old "Average intelligence and persistence has accomplished much more than genius" quote

paulpauper 2y ago
You have to be good, and also care, which is like effort. a lot of young people care or put effort into playing sports but most do not have the talent to make a living at it. "Average intelligence and persistence has accomplished much more than genius" For hard problems, high IQ is necessary but still insufficient. You are not going to solve a hard math problem with average IQ no matter how much persistence you throw at it.
- indigochill 2y ago
  > You are not going to solve a hard math problem with average IQ no matter how much persistence you throw at it. I'm inclined to disagree, but there's an important piece here that I've found when solving problems that were at least hard for me: sometimes I can get hung up on making a particular approach work when it's not going to and what I need to do is back up and find a different angle of attack. For example if you're solving a hard math problem with little math knowledge and average IQ, if you're really passionate and persistent about it, then you'd realize you first need to learn more math to build your understanding of the domain. IQ/persistence in this case is not really about the problem itself, but more about the problem-solving process itself.

red_admiral 2y ago

I think part of the problem with "autistic" is that, although there is an official diagnostic protocol for it, it's far from clear whether that cleaves reality at the joints, as the philosophers say. It's also still mostly an open question if and how autism in women might present differently from in men.

shrimp_emoji 2y ago

MBAs wanna justify less staff so everyone has to be good at and do more things now. :D Be a dev and tech support and business relations and...

galfarragem 2y ago

> I've known a lot of weird nerds, am one myself I suspect most of us here are... At least in some degree.

CalRobert 2y ago

This bizarre romanticization of autism is frustrating for those who are or have loved ones who are nonverbal, stim all day, etc.. I almost wonder if nerfing autism to the point where it's a fun thing to talk about having on tiktok is a way to demonize effective interventions so insurance companies won't have to pay for them.

imbnwa 2y ago
Actual Obsessive Compulsive Disorder is a crippling pathology
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
esskay 2y ago
It's been a similar pattern with ADHD, it feels like its almost been turned into a trend. Although that being said we've had a number of people at our place been diagnosed with ADHD, Autism and in some cases both, all developers, all within the last 3-5 years, and you know what, they're absolutely correct diagnosis. It's a mix of romanticization and a change in acceptance and understanding of the two, and they do often go hand in hand as we've seen. But things like the tiktoks mentioning "My Ausistic brain" or "My ADHD brain" are a bit over the top and are making it feel like it's being treated as a 'cool thing' to have. For me personally I knew I had some sort of autism or ADHD decades ago. It was only when I started having massive issues focusing on work a couple of years back, combined with stimming and an increase in sensory issues that I decided it was time to investigate and sure enough, diagnosed with both. Out of the ~20 developers at my workplace a good 2/3 of them are either diagnosed with one or the other, or exhibit strong signals that would indicate they've likely got at very least ADHD.
- rustyboy 2y ago
  as someone who spent a few years really addicted to stims but eventually got clean, when I started having problems at work with focus and attention, I decided that I didn't want to get diagnosed because - at some fundamental level - stims honestly feel like everyone should be on them. Like everything is better: studying, talking, moving... I've spent a lot of time trying to avoid things that challenge my attention span, mediating and journally, and trying really hard to use organizational tools/apps. With some pretty decent success. I really struggle with knowing when disorder is just code for anti-human (or anti-your personality) work.

davidthewatson 2y ago

> "The author wanting to combine Weird Nerd with autistic is very incorrect IMHO... I've known a lot of weird nerds, am one myself, and there's lots of different flavors, most of them not autistic." That makes one of us - no consensus required. Monotrope? AuDHD? Brenner's Lacanian "Way of Being"? Forensic accounting of which spectrum owns which symptoms is the new ultra-sport - winner take all. The thought that we wind up with yet another control vs. uncontrollable dichotomy of Stoicism worries me, at least in the West. Walk around an Amazon warehouse unannounced for an afternoon observing its transformation of surveillance capitalism into a set of funhouse mirrors where the observer cannot discern between observer and observed - an infinitely extensible Heisenbug. It's as if you took a page from the 1980's PC design playbook and decided that delightful beige was the architecture of the future - a kind of inorganic revenge of the techno-typicals.

ab5tract 2y ago
Can I ask you to explain how this is at all relevant to the clear statistical fact that not every weird nerd is autistic?

hiAndrewQuinn 2y ago

Passion and ambition are just not neuro-vanilla traits. I think that's what you're picking up on. Some people these days who are anything but call themselves autistic, ADHD, etc because they don't have a defensible banner anymore under which they can be passionate or ambitious without some reason behind the reason for it. The only way out is empathy - true empathy, a willingness to accept sometimes (often) people do things for the sheer joy of doing them.

DavidPiper 2y ago
> Passion and ambition are just not neuro-vanilla traits. Hard disagree, which I think is your point. I see this as an offshoot of anti-intellectualism: distaste for / absence of passion and ambition is cultural, not biological, and culture becomes self-sustaining. > The only way out is empathy - true empathy, a willingness to accept sometimes (often) people do things for the sheer joy of doing them. Strong agree, and it's wild to me that this has indeed become a radical idea.