Wood Elf said:
But i also think this is true of most hobby activities, and for the same reason: there are some that feel (correctly or not) that they have no other social outlet, so they commit to what they do have that much more strongly. I have a co-worker who works all the time (364 8-, 10-, or 12-hr shifts last year, frex), and bets on sports when he's not working. And that's his life, as near as i can tell. Other than work, gambling seems to be his only outlet, so he does it constantly, almost obsessively.
It is a matter of degree clearly. I think you are right that the property I have identified in RPGs is not unique to RPGs; by the same token, though, not all hobbies exhibit this property equally. While RPGs are not the most extreme example, I think that they do exhibit the traits I identified more than
most hobbies do.
I also don't really know how to categorize solitary or anti-social hobbies in this scheme because I'm not sure that they are in the same category as gaming. Some people who practice these hobbies do so out of a genuine sense of self-sufficiency whereas others practice them because any social interaction is threatening.
Finally, as to my status: i dunno. I only have two social activities--RPGs and dancing
Dancing is a highly predictable, formalized, ritualized activity too, isn't it?
Though i certainly enjoy conversation, but that really only works with small groups, not huge hordes all at once.
Agreed but I find gaming and conversation have about the same maximum number of functional participants.
I think you underestimate the proliferation of female geeks.
Thanks. You've given me hope.
Which brings me to a counter-point: i don't think your description of using ritual and structure to de-stress social interactions is by any means unique to geekdom.
Agreed. It's just more prevalent here.
In fact, i'd argue that it may even be less prominent in geek social circles. I base this on the fact that more seems to be acceptable in hte geek world than in mayn other worlds. I'm thinking specifically of the generally-lower stigma against different sexual orientations, religions, etc., than you *seem* to find among, say, football fans.
I'm not sure how this fits with the point you are making. Geeks tend to be less discriminatory towards people who differ from social norms because failure to live up to these norms is actually part of the geek identity. People who manage to live up to most or all mainstream social standards tend to be objects of curiosity amongst geeks. We're glad to see them around but a little mystified about what they are doing with us.
Despite the endless flamewars online about D&D vs. V:tM vs. whatever, i've never seen a sober gamer get in a shouting match, much less a fight, over it--football fans get in fights all the time, sometimes while sober, over favorite *teams* (not even different sports).
Again, I'm not sure how this bears on the case you are making. But you have identified an important feature of geek culture: a general avoidance of physical modes of interaction in favour of intellectual modes. When one comes across violent gamers (hey there TB), they are, again, quite the curiosity.
V:TM is a classic example of this; when characters are functioning in a social or intellectual mode, everything is acted out. But when characters are functioning in a physical mode, everything is abstracted. I think one of the values of geek culture is a privileging of intellectual modes of interaction over physical modes.
I wish I could say the same as you regarding shouting matches. While I assiduously avoid gaming groups where these happen, I find, when I interact with geeks at larger social functions that I have not convened, shouting matches are very common. In my experience of geek culture, people have less ability to read social cues in verbal interaction so they are more likely to unconsciously raise their voice, laugh in appropriately or interrupt people. Indeed, every gaming session of the group I joined since moving to Toronto contained a shouting match until the offending player quit.
And, in general, "otherness" seems to be a bigger deal to much of the US than to geeks.
I'm not sure that geek functions as a social category outside North America in the way that it does here. Even between the US and Canada, there is a pretty substantial difference. I think this arises out of the fact that American high schools tend to be more profoundly socially stratified that schools elsewhere in the developed world.
Hmmm...interesting theory. I can certainly see that, especially among adolescents. But, like i said above, i'm not convinced that adolescent geeks are any more fearful, confused, outraged, or powerless than adolescents in general.
I am. Or at least I am convinced that they are less capable of coping with this fear, confusion and powerlessness than their peers and are therefore more conscious of it.
If anything, since the geeks tend to also be the smarter kids, i'd say we're perhaps a *teeny* bit better at putting these things in perspective, and thus accepting them.
I've never really linked intellect to these things. I'm a big fan of
Fight Club just for this scene:
Fight Club said:
Tyler Durden: Did you know that if you mix equal parts of gasoline and frozen orange juice concentrate you can make napalm?
Narrator: No, I did not know that; is that true?
Tyler Durden: That's right... One could make all kinds of explosives, using simple household items.
Narrator: Really... ?
Tyler Durden: If one were so inclined.
Narrator: Tyler, you are by far the most interesting single-serving friend I've ever met... see I have this thing: everything on a plane is single-serving...
Tyler Durden: Oh I get it, it's very clever.
Narrator: Thank you.
Tyler Durden: How's that working out for you?
Narrator: What?
Tyler Durden: Being clever.
Narrator: Great.
Tyler Durden: Keep it up then... Right up.
This could just be my own experience but amongst my friends and me, the capacity for abstract reasoning doesn't seem to help people cope with social situations or keep them in perspective at all. I would more readily posit an inverse relationship between IQ and social well-being than a direct one.
Finally, back to your point about geeks, interactions, and structure: The more i think about it, the more i wonder if you're right. I'm beginning to suspect that, if anything, the rituals of geekness--Star Trek, Monty Python, etc.--are merely filling in for other rituals--sports talk, machismo, gossiping, etc.--
After all, you can't tell me that someone who can run Champions without the book, recite the entirety of The Meaning of Life from memory, and give you the stardate of every 'Trek episode, couldn't also memorize all the baseball stats, if they wanted to.
But look at the substantive differences here: if you are reciting a Monty Python sketch or a Star Trek episode, you can know
exactly what the other person is going to say next and they can know what you will say. Furthermore, for people with low-grade autism, repetition, in and of itself, has a soothing effect. If you are talking about baseball, you still have to get the rhythm of the conversation and know when it is your turn to speak
and you still have to interpret and contextualize the stats.
As a final point on this score, i'll point out that all the other social groups in my highschool seemed to need alcohol (or other stuff) to lubricate their social interactions, but the geek's parties seemed to go just fine without any mind-altering or inhibition-lowering substances. The popular kids seemed not to know what to do to pass time together, except drink.
A few observations about alcohol and socializing:
1.
Trust: People who use alcohol in social situations trust themselves, rightly or wrongly, to behave in a way others approve of even with diminished cognition.
2.
Control: People who use alcohol in social situations tend to be less concerned about having to control themselves or the situation they are in.
3.
Intuition: People who use alcohol in social situations tend to rely on their social intuition in these situations because their cognition is diminished.
4.
Sexuality: Especially in high school, alcohol is associated with permission to behave in a physically sexual way.
5.
Social vs. Intellectual: People who value conversation under the influence of alcohol equally or more than they value conversation without this influence, are more likely to perceive conversation as a social activity rather than an intellectual one. They are more likely to comprehend conversation as a game of catch rather than as a data exchange protocol.
Based on the above list, I would make the argument that geeks avoid alcohol because it disadvantages them socially.
