I don't think this observation--kids from immigrant parents tend to focus more on education--is limited to any particular race, but is a byproduct of the immigrants themselves. In order to leave their home countries, they had to have the personality characteristics which granted them escape. When coming from areas that are not easy to emigrate from, this is commonly through scholastic achievement. It certainly was the case with my father leaving Iran, and seems to be the case with the author of this piece. As such, the best students of a nation--whether they are from Nigeria, Iran, or China--come to America and instill the same values in their children, the values that got them to this country. Interestingly enough, these values seem almost universal. I've gotten the "don't chase women, let them chase you" speech so many times I can recite it, yet the more I hear it from children of other immigrants, the more I regard it as truth than just my father's pontifications.
An interesting question would be to look at the children a few generations removed, to see if they continue the emphasis on education, or if they are swamped by American culture.
This gets much more general: successful people almost always believe that their way to success is the best (or at least one of the best) ways to have gotten there. In fact, that's mostly what this site is about. ;-)
"kids from immigrant parents tend to focus more on education"
Or, more accurately, kids from voluntary immigrant parents tend to focus more on education. C.f. Voluntary and Involuntary Minorities: A Cultural-Ecological Theory of School Performance with Some Implications for Education. Ogbu himself is actually a Nigerian.
My family came over from the USSR in the late 80s and although I was too young to remember the details, my parents told me that the USSR did not make it easy to leave: they had to go through a whole slew of questions that tried to show that they were perfectly well off in the USSR and there was no persecution.
Their story makes it seem to me that it would have taken a more than voluntary effort to leave the USSR, whether you were a Jew or not.
As an aside, before the mass immigration of the Soviet Jewry there was a whole group of people called the Refuseniks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refusenik) which were denied the right to immigrate but were not allowed to go back to their jobs.
There was a very good documentary made about them recently (http://www.refusenikmovie.com/) that I recommend watching if you are interested in this topic.
That also brings up another question though, why are they being forced to emigrate? Could they be intelligent? Because of that aspect, could their views clash with the society they currently reside in? In many fascist nations, the intelligentsia are the first to be marginalized.
Perhaps you could separate this out by motives for immigration to the US, but I think the point still stands that people who hold education dear to them will instill that value into their children.
I took a class recently on the sociology of education. We focused heavily on Ogbu -- he has done outstanding work that is worth a look from any layman.
Also see RZA/Wu Tang Clan, Pharrell Williams/N.E.R.D. It certainly seems like some aspects of nerddom/geekiness are perfectly acceptable: video games, kung fu, sci-fi, etc. Of course, you have to be cool already for geeky things to be acceptable.
Wumi, color does not have much to do with popularity.
Popularity depends on what you do better than the average guy and where you do it.
In America (where Hollywood and Sports are kings) if you play football better than 98% of your schoolmates you are likely to be popular. The same does not hold truth for a top programmer within is high school.
In some parts of your continent, yo could be the best soccer player in the neighborhood, it would not matter. The kid who gets the girl is the kid who scores As in school, although that kid is not much worried about girls.
This is particularly true. Conformism is particularly strong in the black community. In college I had two good black friends. Both who grew up middle class and smart Both who were ostracized for having white friends. One liked heavy metal, computers and video games. One I roomed with for a year and he was harassed about it. We would receive threatening anonymous phone calls at all hours. If I answered, they would hang up. Eventually the campus police were able to trace the calls and we found out that it involved several people.
"Wumi, color does not have much to do with popularity."
I think it does.
In many high schools in America, social groups tend to follow racial lines, though by no means absolutely. If you're a white or Asian nerd, there are plenty of other similar nerds for you to associate with. However, if you're a black or Hispanic nerd, there aren't so many.
For me, this never ended up being a problem because all of the nerds shared almost every class, so we ended up being a pretty tight group on our own. For a black nerd who wasn't as nerdy as I am, things were probably more difficult. He wouldn't be in all of the same classes, so he wouldn't grow as close to the nerds, but he'd still be relatively isolated from the "normal" black people.
It seems that blacks and Hispanics have a larger social disincentive for being a nerd than other groups, though that is probably on the lower end of factors that contribute to underrepresentation in the nerd population.
I saw Banjamin Nugent, author of "American Nerd: The Story of My People", on a talk show a few weeks ago. He mentioned that nerdiness can be a kind of 'hyperwhiteness', a refusal to adopt the black-influenced lingo and styles of cool kids.
He talks about that theory -- credited to a UC Santa Barbara linguist, Mary Bucholtz -- a bit in this recent interview with the LA Times:
You see, unpopular people are people who have not learned to play the game successfully. There are two competitions going on in schools:
1. Be as good as you can be socially
2. Be as good as you can be regarding intellectual development
Every student will want to have the maximum of both those things, but the problem is that most people tend to choose one path and then work to excel at it. The most popular kids are as likely to be just as successful as the most intelligent nerds. It takes a bit of skill from the other branch to land at the top of either branch, and so those at the top will usually be successful people.
The problem is that these two branches seem to be exclusive. To be intellectually at the top, you have to forgo a lot of the social activities that allow you develop the necessary skills to get to the top of social ladder. And to be socially at the top, you lack the time to study, so you fall behind intellectually.
This is not about school in general - it's about life. To develop a skill, you need to focus on the skill, and your social life drops correspondingly.
But there is this middle ground. The people who know how to strike that balance between the two paths. The ones who are aware of the social hierarchies, and who make sure they do not drop in value socially. The popular kids who spend enough time studying, that their scores still remain good enough for them to do what they want to do.
There are a LOT of people who belong to that middle ground. But you know what, they don't write articles on the internet, because they have nothing to complain about! They liked high school and ended up doing well there. A lot of them are doing way better than the nerds who complain about how unpopular they were.
High school was your first taste of business. In business you need to develop your product, but you also need to make your sales. You cannot concentrate on one exclusively and leave the other away. Both require equal time and are equally important.
That's what these nerds don't recognize. They think there is some conspiracy against them - no, you just did not understand the system well enough to play it properly. If you went back in time now, would you not be able to do it better?
I don't see how you're disagreeing with pg (and I haven't read wumi's post). IIRC, Paul's essay also makes the argument that nerds would rather pursue their nerdy interests rather than abandon them in favor of investing more time/energy in being popular. I don't think nerds wish they were popular, they just wish everyone would leave them alone instead of hating and hassling them. Sure, they may wonder why they're unpopular, but once they understand that it's a tradeoff between nerdiness and popularity, they'd rather keep the nerdy interests. The painful part is that they might not come to understand this tradeoff until long after HS.
I'm not sure where my post would lead you to suggest that there is no middle ground. In fact I mention that (partially) by virtue of being a good athlete, I happened to garner a fair amount of popularity. In fact, from your comments I'm not sure if you read what I wrote at all.
Really, if you've been to public high school in America (or, as I noted, several other countries), popularity is derived mostly from good looks/general attractiveness, athletic prowess, or popularity by association (whether your siblings or your best friends).
(edit: for blacks, this could and does include an affinity for hip-hop culture -- dancing, rapping, beat boxin, etc., and by good looks/attractiveness, per the article, I am inferring general outward appearance, i.e. clothes, shoes, fitted caps, etc.)
There's nothing to game about the system, if you're attractive, a great athlete, or have really popular friends, you in turn, will be popular.
I was at least one of those three things.
If you're not one of those three things, it's highly unlikely that you are (or were) very popular.
You're really just painting a broad brush when you say 'that's what these nerds don't recognize ...you just did not understand the system well enough to play it properly.'
Really? There's not a conspiracy at all -- in black culture, especially amongst the youth of today, intelligence is most often looked down upon and something generally avoided, to which much of what I wrote concerned.
I think you're confusing my reflection for complaints. (edit: I realize now you're just making a broad swipe at all nerd culture, apparently, and not actually rebutting my writing.)
Does your name not usually have an n in it? And is it not usually a girls name?
I read your article to the end. This black culture looking down on intelligence thing is not new or insightful. I've read about that lots of time on the internet. Black culture does not look down on intelligence. It looks down on nerdiness.
Let's imagine there is some really cool black guy - let's say the 50 cent of your high school. He does all the 'in' things and wears the right shoes etc. He also is consistently the best in the class. NOBODY would look down on him, rather, he'd be regarded with extreme awe. He'd be monster cool, and still effortlessly ace all exams.
Looking good is an easy way to be popular, but there are lots of terrible looking gangster like figures who are quite popular in high schools.
Being popular is about standing out in a manner that makes people want to follow you. There are many ways to do so, and each of those ways can be artificially created.
It's no god given thing.
I don't get what you're trying to say in your last sentence, but I never implied that pg was some superdork.
This is conjecture vs. (limited) life experience. My life experience says different than your conjecture, but of course I don't presume to say that all black culture is like my personal experience, although from what I've seen, heard, and read, it mostly is.
"He'd be monster cool, and still effortlessly ace all exams."
Such people do not exist, given the "effortlessly" part. I think there is a consensus now that "talent" is mostly the end product of a lot of effort. Because outside observers do not see all of the hard work, only the end product, they infer that there must be some "talent" thing that explains why the other person can do things he cannot.
I believe pg made this point, arguing that the reason that nerds do not exert the effort necessary to become popular is that it would detract from the effort they can exert towards the things that are really important to them.
Just for the record, I felt like I effortlessly did very well on most of my tests in high school. All I did was go to class, stay awake as much as possible, and do my homework. I never had to study in high school, where I was valedictorian, and I actually feel like my high school was pretty good. I did well on standardized tests (35 ACT, 1500 SAT), and felt at least as prepared as other freshman honors students at the Ohio State University.
Honestly, I'm not trying to brag here, but I do want to provide a counterpoint to your "consensus". I agree that many talents (musical, visual art, sports, etc.) require a lot of effort. Perhaps in the sense of general mental exercise, there is effort involved in being intelligent: I read a lot in high school, and I always find myself playing weird numbers games in my head (like adding up the digits of long numbers to see if it's divisible by 3 or 9). But as far as putting in a lot of effort to "ace all exams", I never really felt like I had to do that, and I highly doubt that I'm the only person like this.
I went to a fairly atypical school district in Silicon Valley where you didn't have bullies beating kids up, so I probably can't understand what everyone else is talking about. In my experience, however, you only got shunned and had severe unpopularity if you were lacking in fairly basic social skills--like, say, not throwing a tantrum after turning six. To me, it seemed like being average and sort of blending in by not doing anything too socially awkward was enough to avoid getting picked on. I don't think basic social skills are that hard to pick up for most people, and you don't need to sacrifice being smart to have the basics of not being awkward. Does anyone have any comments?
Are you younger? I graduated high school in 2004 and it was a lot better than suburban high school in the past. This was at a reasonably wealthy, mostly white suburban high school near Pittsburgh (two turnpike exits from Paul Graham's high school, which was Pittsburgh's first uber-developed suburb, Monroeville).
At my high school, the people who had in middle school been popular, had mostly gotten into hard drugs and been shunned by everyone else, though these people never realized they weren't popular anymore. The football players that weren't into hard drugs were all nice enough. The cheerleaders were mostly ugly. No one was really picked on, though there were three or for kids without physical or mental disabilities that sat with the kids with physical and mental disabilities at lunch.
I was never popular but my senior year I became good friends with the class president, who played drums in the marching band with me. He was the most popular person in my high school and he was a rare geek with a great deal of social intelligence.
Yes, class of 2005. Most people in Palo Alto are pretty gung-ho about sending their babies off to a Top 20 college, so being smart got you respect. The only people I could think of who I would consider ostracized in school were those who were incredibly annoying or awkward to be around, i.e. it was a matter of social skills, not being smart. I do realize I went to an atypical high school, but if you're socially incompetent, you may not recognize that your social problems arise from your social incompetence. That's why I'm a little suspicious of pg when he claims that he's seen both sides of the popularity scale and that he now knows the magic formulas to apply if he had to travel back in time.
Echoing jey, I don't see anything in what you are saying that contradicts pg or Wumi. I think pg was pretty clear that there is a continuum of popularity, and nerds are at one of the extreme points on that scale.
"If you went back in time now, would you not be able to do it better?"
In some ways, probably not. I just wouldn't be as stressed about it. I still really don't have much in common with the people with whom I went to high school, and I still don't think it would be worth sacrificing any of the things I enjoy and that have led me to the life I have now (imperfect as it is) in order to get the kids I went to high school with to like me more.
Is it really just wearing the right clothes that makes you popular? Maybe the "nerds" are just fooling themselves, making excuses for their social ineptness?
What exactly defines nerd anyway? Not being able to talk straight to people? Doing weird things? But what is weird? Maybe building your own radio with nobody to talk to was weird, but what if you used your electronics skills to build fancy effects for your electric guitar and proceeded to rock the school?
Maybe it is rather the other way round: being unpopular causes nerdiness (in some lucky cases). I guess you can be smart and popular at the same time, but if you are not popular, it really frees a lot of time for thinking. And if you are lucky, you'll start thinking about something that comes in useful later on.
if you look at a lot of the popular students, you'll find they are often of certain MBTI types (ESFP/ESTP). there's also a particular type (ENFJ) that is insanely charismatic (Oprah Winfrey is an example,) and they are also very popular in different ways
i know that it's pretty much impossible for me to pull that sort of charisma from myself in any quantity, while to them it comes naturally, likely often just through impulse
in other words, no. you probably won't become more popular by trying. wearing the right clothes, and doing all sorts of things that the popular kids do will only make you look like a poser. the popular kids don't do those things to be popular, that's just what you see on the surface. and if you can't see beyond the surface, then you probably don't get it
"in other words, no. you probably won't become more popular by trying. wearing the right clothes, and doing all sorts of things that the popular kids do will only make you look like a poser. the popular kids don't do those things to be popular, that's just what you see on the surface."
Can't find it right now, but I read a Zen of Cool test where a man is brought into a room full of clothes, and asked which outfit is coolest.
This whole 'nerd' vs 'jock' meme seems to be a fairly typical situation of 'invest' vs 'consume'. A young kid has no other assets apart of time. You can spend you time being popular NOW, at the expense of studies and other form of self-enrichment. Sports (with their short fitness time-span) are not really an investment, unless you are a really talented athlete.
So, by investing your time wisely as a kid you have a good chance of reaping monetary rewards later -- in term of a good job or even your own business.
An additional bonus for geeks comes in a form of above average growth rate for knowledge industry. We are living through a kind of 'industrial revolution' that is changing the shape of traditional industries. The rate of return that an internet software business can deliver is unmatched. And it can only be run by a geek, somebody who has spent countless hours bending his mind around recursion rather than flexing his muscles in front of girls.
And of course, "the girls will come chasing", after you reap economic rent from your investment.
I'm hesitant to ask this question because I think many of you will probably jump down my throat, but I will anyway.
Are any of you actually Black American? By which I mean a son or daughter of American Slavery.
I only ask because I would like to hear from one of them, about being a nerd in the black community. The reason I ask is because I've seen in Newark and LA for example, where even black athletes are only worried about getting home after school. I talked to a football standout from Newark and his exact words were,"I'm not tryin' to meet new faces at school, if I want women, that's what church is for." What I mean is, when I talk to these kids you get the sense that, between the police, the teachers, and the gang members, high school for them is a dangerous place. Many of them have expressed little interest in popularity, or looking down on others, indeed, they express little interest in even knowing others. It is dangerous to them. They SEEM to be just trying to get through the day without crossing the wrong person. Or as the young man I talked to would say, "Ain't no kids in a ghetto high school."
This contrasts sharply with things I've read in the national press and in reports like this about being 'cool', and looking down on the smart kids.
-- EDITED OUT A PART PEOPLE MAY FIND OFFENSIVE --
I'd imagine the average nerdy guy from the black underclass is far more concerned with mistaken identity on his way home, than he is with being accosted because he is smart.
Multi-generational African American "Nerd" here.
I'd like to point out that you are conflating "African American" and "poor/ghetto".
To the OP, I'd say that your opinions are based on your experiences, and everyone's are different. As mentioned further along in this thread, you are equating "Nerd" w/ intelligent.
Actually, it's interesting that you say that, because the part I edited out clarified that issue. That is, it explained my belief that there are probably, AT LEAST, two black communities. Let's call them the black under class and the black upper class.
The kids from the underclass don't worry about being a 'nerd' or popular or whatever. As I said, I think they have far more pressing concerns. They worry about not setting off some gang banger by stepping on his shoe. Or having said gang banger mistake them for cross town rivals. Or having a police officer mistake their wallets for guns. You get the idea.
Whereas kids from the black upper class are a little different, and this is the part where I have to be careful. I think kids in the black upper class think that being 'cool' is being from the black under class. So they go out and do their best imitation of kids from the black underclass. Only they don't know much about the black underclass, so it comes off cartoonish. Only slightly less cartoonish than when white kids do it.
Since our 'interface' to black America is really the black upper class, we get the impression that acting cool is more important than being smart. That doesn't necessarily mean that kids in the black under class believe that. My suspicion is that we don't really know what those kids believe, and we'd be surprised to find just how pragmatic their beliefs are. I think it was Dr. Dre who said he didn't know any rappers who got rich selling music to the 'black under class'. I'm paraphrasing there, but again, you get his point.
I'd describe my upbringing as solidly "Black Middle Class", having roots and connections in both extremes.
As I mentioned, this is all a very subjective discussion, and generalities are generally wrong.
Having said that, the black communities have all the usual cliques: nerd, jock, preppy, musician, etc. and schools which value some cliques over others.
Speaking of an "average" school is as misleading as speaking of an "average" parent (insert the usual joke about half a bra and half a jock strap).
p.s. I think Dr Dre was pointing out that the "poor & urban" niche is not a particularly lucrative one, thus the need to appeal to the mainstream.
"Are any of you actually Black American? By which I mean a son or daughter of American Slavery"
No, My great-grandfather emigrated to Canada from Barbados and my great-grandmother was from Jamaica. This means I am probably a great- great- great- grandson of British Slavery.
I have noticed the same phenomenon in the black and hispanic community as wumi. I think PG's explanation is still valid though. Kids choose popularity over intelligence because becoming successful by being smart seems to be more difficult than becoming successful by being popular. There have not been many visible examples of blacks and hispanics who became successful by being smart so when a child has to choose between intelligence and popularity they are more likely to choose popularity.
I'm going to hypothesize that there is a correlation between unpopularity of nerds and the probability of success through intelligence. The less likely it is that people will become successful by being smart the more likely people will try to be successful by being popular. In the competition to become popular the first ones to lose are the ones who don't care about being popular: nerds.
There are a lot more examples of smart and successful blacks and hispanics now than there were a generation ago. I bet that black nerds will become more popular soon. Of course, they'll still be unpopular because they're nerds.
"Kids choose popularity over intelligence because becoming successful by being smart seems to be more difficult than becoming successful by being popular. "
I quite agree. More generally, it's about increasing one's social ranking in relation to others. And culture (not limited to ethnic) plays a huge part in that.
Someone posted earlier that a kid would be popular if he were simply better than others at something. But this disregards culture, not just black, either. (I noticed the same thing in the schools I went to - British and all white).
For instance, certain strands of hip-hop seem to laud brash and expensive jewelery. If a kid grows up with this influence, he will internalise this and laud anyone he sees who exhibits similar property. He would not think to do the same with anyone who announces he has read a certain book because he has not grown up to laud this achievement, because of his exposure to this micro-culture.
i think humans are experts in spotting "the to stupid to mate with".
if you are clever enough chances are the average person will think you are odd enough to be labelled stupid.
1. Your post is clumsily worded. Your argument seems to be 'oddness is mistaken for stupidity'. But you never really state that explicitly, so I'm not sure.
2. If we're 'experts' about spotting people who are too stupid, then why do we mistake oddness for stupidity?
3. Your grammar is also poor - e.g., 'to stupid to mate with'.
I think white society views black people are more masculine and physical, asian people as less so.
You might not like that, but that doesn't affect whether it's true or not.
The result is that black people are expected to excel at the physical. When they don't (instead favoring the intellectual) they're viewed as not making use of this gift.
1. People are in groups for purposes. Example: A soccer team is a group for the purpose of playing soccer.
2. Leadership is contextual to the purpose of a group. A great soccer player is likely to be a leader on a soccer team, but if she is a bad musician, she won't be a leader in a band, no matter how charismatic or likeable she is.
3. Popularity is leadership without authority.
4. Lacking an external evaluation function, a group implicitly invents one.
This implies that nerds would actually be popular in groups with an evaluation function for smartness.
The solution is to create critical masses of people brought together in the context of a need to be smart.
Was so happy to see this BLACK NERD thread but ultimately, I have decided the article just ain't right.
For example, this is wrong: HE SAID>>>For blacks, it goes above and beyond just clothes — sneakers (Air Force ones, Jordans, etc.), jewelry, hairstyle, shape ups, belt buckles, chains, tattoos, diamond studs, do rags, fitted caps — which makes popularity that much more exclusive and more difficult to attain.<<<
Are you kidding me? Where where you on the 4th of July when black folk of all economic backgrounds were out cooking out outside across America, with their families and enjoying Being a Family my Friend?
And he said: >>If you ever watch a black family (and this holds trues from Latinos whom I’ve spent time with as well) they spend much more time worrying about the material and outwardly appearance — driving the right car, clothes, accessories, hair, etc. Paul alludes several times throughout the essay (and indeed, in his response,<<
Naw, this ain't right either because my son, aged 16 (and we all black right) spent a lot of time learning how to drive Boston streets, thru downtown, into Cambridge, past Somerville and back to our burbs and all the way along we discussed why all the music he was playing on the car CD sounded to me like "FALL OUT BOY" or "HAWTHORNE HEIGHTS" and he said -- Daddy now, its all original! His playlist has several hundred tracks, mostly different bands...
"I know it is but I'm sorry son, I said, but with some exceptions in the tracks playing, I haven't heard anything original from your 52 track playlist, that to me did not sound like FALL OUT BOY or HAWTHORNE HEIGHTS."
So, he defended it over and over and said - "No, they don't 'em sound like them dad." Yeah, right. I listen to over a hundred new tracks every month, all genres and I do know better!!
I was itching to get some RAP/HIP HOP even if it was that hypnotic track by Lil Wayne talking about Lolipops.
Personally, I love the FOB, HH stuff but I don't want to give overdue credits to their copiers! Well, he does and so went the discussion.
That's a small diverse taste of Black Life from BLACK NERDS in America Mr. davidadewumi! Your piece screamed of a lack of diversity in the African American American family.
So, you are right and you are so wrong too, which is my ultimate conclusion -- you like a viewpoint that adequately explains how diverse we all are, no matter what color we are.
Why are we assuming that all nerds are smart? My high school had several "dumb" nerds (Napoleon Dynamite-ish). Nerds are people who are socially inept. Add intelligence to a nerd and all you have is an intelligent nerd, he has not moved up the social ladder at all. The real question should be "Why are smart black kids with no social skills unpopular?" but that wouldn’t be much of a question, would it? They’re unpopular because they have no social skills, being smart has nothing to do with it. Since the author states that blacks put so much emphasis on their social status, it makes perfect sense that anyone not exhibiting socially acceptable behaviors would be deemed unpopular. You could easily have said:
Why are black kids who wear tight clothes unpopular?
Why are black kids who listen to heavy metal unpopular?
Why are black male virgins unpopular?
If you do unpopular stuff then you will not be popular. Interesting article, but way off base. Oh, and if you are wondering, I’m BLACK.
In hindsight you're classifying these individuals as Geeks, Nerds, Dorks, but to an average high schooler these terms are synonymous unless you actually belonged to one of these groups and felt the need to create a hierarchy :)
I think this discussion is about 2 or 3 decades out of date.
Currently the issue isn't whether you are black, white, hispanic, or whatever. It's whether you are male or female. Women have taken over in the high schools and colleges. University enrollment is almost 2/3rds female nationwide and the gap is growing.....
Our problem right now isn't race, it's gender. Boys are dropping out in droves and at very early ages.
If you go into any government office right now you will see most of the employees will be women. I routinely go into offices now where there will be 20 or 30 women working and zero men. The men serve as janitors and gardeners. It's all they are qualified for.
Problem is getting worse and public school administrators are totally blind to the issue.
In terms you may understand, the issue everyone is discussing is why the number of black, or latina females, is so low relative their population percentages in the larger society. In particular, the percentage of latinas in the US college student population is far out of line when considering their population percentage in the larger society. Even more so when one considers that 2/3rds of university enrollment is female. That means that, all other things being equal, US university enrollment should be 10% latina, since hispanics constitute 15% of our population. The thing is . . . latina University enrollment is not 10% of overall University enrollment. Meaning, for some reason, white women are making it to the University level at a far greater rate. Why is this?
It is a legitimate question to ask, and unfortunately it demands an examination of those obvious differences like ". . . whether you are black, white, hispanic, or whatever . . ."
I agree with you, male-female disparities should be discussed as well. Perhaps you could start another topic?
To copy the comment from your post, a large reason that these 'nerds' are unpopular are they way they defer to authority and suck up to the teacher. Even till now, I really dislike those people. Those nerds are conformist and learn exactly what they are told to learn.
The cool kids are the ones that do things their own way. By virtue of that, they get to lead. If I were in a 2 seater plane that crashes on an island that has a dinosaur on it, I'd prefer to have a non-confirmist rebel type with me instead of a shake-in-my-boots where-is-my-teacher type!
Conformity is orthogonal to nerdiness. I was absolutely a nerd in High School. I was also a non-conformist. I gave respect based on merit and admiration. That style of respect (or lack thereof) got me in hot water with more than one teacher. In fact, most of my nerd friends are some of the most non-conformist people I know. If you depend on admiration and popularity from your classmates then you will desperately cling to someone else's perception of "cool." The nerds go their own ways.
On your dinosaur-island, the nerd probably knows how to find clean water, build a shelter, start a fire, and set a trap. And how to make a dinosaur-slaying weapon from the wreckage of your plane.
Sounds like a lot more help than some "non-conformist" who doesn't know anything outside of the High School popularity game.
I had a very smart, very nerdy friend in high school who wasn't cool. Whenever the French teacher handed out an assignment he thought was stupid, he simply refused to do it. No popular kid would have ever done that.
What I (personally) find very interesting in American schools is the "unpopular"=="picked-on" relation.
I understand pg's argument that you have to work at being popular. In my (Indian) school, I was a typical nerd - I was poor, often wore uniforms from my previous years, I loved to read, and couldn't bother to spend the time socializing. There were a few others like me and a few widely popular, athletic, rich kids.
But we never got picked on for "being nerds"! Never! If anything, we got respect for being good at our work. It didn't make us popular but we had good friends (hell I had my share of girls in high school) and overall an enjoyable experience.
Sure there were cases of bullying, but they were one-off. It was not nerd==target and even the bullying was handled pretty soon, either by us (as a group) or the teachers.
I really would like to know where this animosity towards nerds comes from. I think that's the interesting (and painful) part of American culture that needs probing. It's definitely not universal. Any ideas?
I think it's a popular cliché in the media, mainly. I never saw it, personally, but beyond 4th grade my class size was less than 100, so my experience isn't exactly representative. In my school, the only ones who really got picked on were those with disabilities (unfortunately, but it was mostly in "good fun", like getting them to say funny stuff, etc., not ever anything violent).
I'm not trying to over-generalize my experience, but I think that in this day and age, nerds are not picked on nearly as much as you might be led to believe by popular media. Perhaps 20 or even 10 years ago that was true, and now those individuals are the same ones who are writing the same old nerd clichés into modern-day settings.
Let's assume you are a male.
To be popular you have to be attractive to females.
To be attractive to females you have to be (strong or rich or ruthless) and (not stupid)=A and B.
Definition of nerd:"Person that unconciously is labelled as stupid by the average person even though they conciously realize that he is the opposite".
Since the judgment(by the females) mentioned above is unconciously made it follows that nerds are unpopular.
I never understood the (North) American "high school popularist fetichism". Must be a cultural self spreading virus (meme). I wonder how can you get rid of it? Because i haven't see such behaviour in South America, there the division is rather blured, the nerds are friends with everbody else, an the populars aren't so "elitists" and bulliers... that reminds me this clever bully fight back story: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/nova-scotia/story/2007/09/18/pink-t...
Maybe black kids show a lot more bigotry in all forms, since they are not restrained in almost any way in that sense (they are answerable for sexism though). A white person that says he or she hates black people is considered a bigot, but a black person that says he or she hates white people isn't really criticized. Same probably goes for hating nerds. Incidentally, in black society, being a nerd is sometimes termed "acting white."
68 comments
[ 5.3 ms ] story [ 151 ms ] threadAn interesting question would be to look at the children a few generations removed, to see if they continue the emphasis on education, or if they are swamped by American culture.
Or, more accurately, kids from voluntary immigrant parents tend to focus more on education. C.f. Voluntary and Involuntary Minorities: A Cultural-Ecological Theory of School Performance with Some Implications for Education. Ogbu himself is actually a Nigerian.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7301985.stm
Their story makes it seem to me that it would have taken a more than voluntary effort to leave the USSR, whether you were a Jew or not.
As an aside, before the mass immigration of the Soviet Jewry there was a whole group of people called the Refuseniks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refusenik) which were denied the right to immigrate but were not allowed to go back to their jobs.
There was a very good documentary made about them recently (http://www.refusenikmovie.com/) that I recommend watching if you are interested in this topic.
Perhaps you could separate this out by motives for immigration to the US, but I think the point still stands that people who hold education dear to them will instill that value into their children.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Urkel#The_Ratings
Popularity depends on what you do better than the average guy and where you do it.
In America (where Hollywood and Sports are kings) if you play football better than 98% of your schoolmates you are likely to be popular. The same does not hold truth for a top programmer within is high school.
In some parts of your continent, yo could be the best soccer player in the neighborhood, it would not matter. The kid who gets the girl is the kid who scores As in school, although that kid is not much worried about girls.
I think it does.
In many high schools in America, social groups tend to follow racial lines, though by no means absolutely. If you're a white or Asian nerd, there are plenty of other similar nerds for you to associate with. However, if you're a black or Hispanic nerd, there aren't so many.
For me, this never ended up being a problem because all of the nerds shared almost every class, so we ended up being a pretty tight group on our own. For a black nerd who wasn't as nerdy as I am, things were probably more difficult. He wouldn't be in all of the same classes, so he wouldn't grow as close to the nerds, but he'd still be relatively isolated from the "normal" black people.
It seems that blacks and Hispanics have a larger social disincentive for being a nerd than other groups, though that is probably on the lower end of factors that contribute to underrepresentation in the nerd population.
He talks about that theory -- credited to a UC Santa Barbara linguist, Mary Bucholtz -- a bit in this recent interview with the LA Times:
http://www.latimes.com/features/books/la-ca-nerd15-2008jun15...
You see, unpopular people are people who have not learned to play the game successfully. There are two competitions going on in schools:
1. Be as good as you can be socially 2. Be as good as you can be regarding intellectual development
Every student will want to have the maximum of both those things, but the problem is that most people tend to choose one path and then work to excel at it. The most popular kids are as likely to be just as successful as the most intelligent nerds. It takes a bit of skill from the other branch to land at the top of either branch, and so those at the top will usually be successful people.
The problem is that these two branches seem to be exclusive. To be intellectually at the top, you have to forgo a lot of the social activities that allow you develop the necessary skills to get to the top of social ladder. And to be socially at the top, you lack the time to study, so you fall behind intellectually.
This is not about school in general - it's about life. To develop a skill, you need to focus on the skill, and your social life drops correspondingly.
But there is this middle ground. The people who know how to strike that balance between the two paths. The ones who are aware of the social hierarchies, and who make sure they do not drop in value socially. The popular kids who spend enough time studying, that their scores still remain good enough for them to do what they want to do.
There are a LOT of people who belong to that middle ground. But you know what, they don't write articles on the internet, because they have nothing to complain about! They liked high school and ended up doing well there. A lot of them are doing way better than the nerds who complain about how unpopular they were.
High school was your first taste of business. In business you need to develop your product, but you also need to make your sales. You cannot concentrate on one exclusively and leave the other away. Both require equal time and are equally important.
That's what these nerds don't recognize. They think there is some conspiracy against them - no, you just did not understand the system well enough to play it properly. If you went back in time now, would you not be able to do it better?
Really, if you've been to public high school in America (or, as I noted, several other countries), popularity is derived mostly from good looks/general attractiveness, athletic prowess, or popularity by association (whether your siblings or your best friends).
(edit: for blacks, this could and does include an affinity for hip-hop culture -- dancing, rapping, beat boxin, etc., and by good looks/attractiveness, per the article, I am inferring general outward appearance, i.e. clothes, shoes, fitted caps, etc.)
There's nothing to game about the system, if you're attractive, a great athlete, or have really popular friends, you in turn, will be popular.
I was at least one of those three things.
If you're not one of those three things, it's highly unlikely that you are (or were) very popular.
You're really just painting a broad brush when you say 'that's what these nerds don't recognize ...you just did not understand the system well enough to play it properly.'
Really? There's not a conspiracy at all -- in black culture, especially amongst the youth of today, intelligence is most often looked down upon and something generally avoided, to which much of what I wrote concerned.
I think you're confusing my reflection for complaints. (edit: I realize now you're just making a broad swipe at all nerd culture, apparently, and not actually rebutting my writing.)
I read your article to the end. This black culture looking down on intelligence thing is not new or insightful. I've read about that lots of time on the internet. Black culture does not look down on intelligence. It looks down on nerdiness.
Let's imagine there is some really cool black guy - let's say the 50 cent of your high school. He does all the 'in' things and wears the right shoes etc. He also is consistently the best in the class. NOBODY would look down on him, rather, he'd be regarded with extreme awe. He'd be monster cool, and still effortlessly ace all exams.
Looking good is an easy way to be popular, but there are lots of terrible looking gangster like figures who are quite popular in high schools.
Being popular is about standing out in a manner that makes people want to follow you. There are many ways to do so, and each of those ways can be artificially created.
It's no god given thing.
I don't get what you're trying to say in your last sentence, but I never implied that pg was some superdork.
Such people do not exist, given the "effortlessly" part. I think there is a consensus now that "talent" is mostly the end product of a lot of effort. Because outside observers do not see all of the hard work, only the end product, they infer that there must be some "talent" thing that explains why the other person can do things he cannot.
I believe pg made this point, arguing that the reason that nerds do not exert the effort necessary to become popular is that it would detract from the effort they can exert towards the things that are really important to them.
Honestly, I'm not trying to brag here, but I do want to provide a counterpoint to your "consensus". I agree that many talents (musical, visual art, sports, etc.) require a lot of effort. Perhaps in the sense of general mental exercise, there is effort involved in being intelligent: I read a lot in high school, and I always find myself playing weird numbers games in my head (like adding up the digits of long numbers to see if it's divisible by 3 or 9). But as far as putting in a lot of effort to "ace all exams", I never really felt like I had to do that, and I highly doubt that I'm the only person like this.
At my high school, the people who had in middle school been popular, had mostly gotten into hard drugs and been shunned by everyone else, though these people never realized they weren't popular anymore. The football players that weren't into hard drugs were all nice enough. The cheerleaders were mostly ugly. No one was really picked on, though there were three or for kids without physical or mental disabilities that sat with the kids with physical and mental disabilities at lunch.
I was never popular but my senior year I became good friends with the class president, who played drums in the marching band with me. He was the most popular person in my high school and he was a rare geek with a great deal of social intelligence.
"If you went back in time now, would you not be able to do it better?"
In some ways, probably not. I just wouldn't be as stressed about it. I still really don't have much in common with the people with whom I went to high school, and I still don't think it would be worth sacrificing any of the things I enjoy and that have led me to the life I have now (imperfect as it is) in order to get the kids I went to high school with to like me more.
What exactly defines nerd anyway? Not being able to talk straight to people? Doing weird things? But what is weird? Maybe building your own radio with nobody to talk to was weird, but what if you used your electronics skills to build fancy effects for your electric guitar and proceeded to rock the school?
Maybe it is rather the other way round: being unpopular causes nerdiness (in some lucky cases). I guess you can be smart and popular at the same time, but if you are not popular, it really frees a lot of time for thinking. And if you are lucky, you'll start thinking about something that comes in useful later on.
i know that it's pretty much impossible for me to pull that sort of charisma from myself in any quantity, while to them it comes naturally, likely often just through impulse
in other words, no. you probably won't become more popular by trying. wearing the right clothes, and doing all sorts of things that the popular kids do will only make you look like a poser. the popular kids don't do those things to be popular, that's just what you see on the surface. and if you can't see beyond the surface, then you probably don't get it
Can't find it right now, but I read a Zen of Cool test where a man is brought into a room full of clothes, and asked which outfit is coolest.
The correct answer: "Whatever I put on."
So, by investing your time wisely as a kid you have a good chance of reaping monetary rewards later -- in term of a good job or even your own business.
An additional bonus for geeks comes in a form of above average growth rate for knowledge industry. We are living through a kind of 'industrial revolution' that is changing the shape of traditional industries. The rate of return that an internet software business can deliver is unmatched. And it can only be run by a geek, somebody who has spent countless hours bending his mind around recursion rather than flexing his muscles in front of girls.
And of course, "the girls will come chasing", after you reap economic rent from your investment.
Are any of you actually Black American? By which I mean a son or daughter of American Slavery.
I only ask because I would like to hear from one of them, about being a nerd in the black community. The reason I ask is because I've seen in Newark and LA for example, where even black athletes are only worried about getting home after school. I talked to a football standout from Newark and his exact words were,"I'm not tryin' to meet new faces at school, if I want women, that's what church is for." What I mean is, when I talk to these kids you get the sense that, between the police, the teachers, and the gang members, high school for them is a dangerous place. Many of them have expressed little interest in popularity, or looking down on others, indeed, they express little interest in even knowing others. It is dangerous to them. They SEEM to be just trying to get through the day without crossing the wrong person. Or as the young man I talked to would say, "Ain't no kids in a ghetto high school."
This contrasts sharply with things I've read in the national press and in reports like this about being 'cool', and looking down on the smart kids.
-- EDITED OUT A PART PEOPLE MAY FIND OFFENSIVE --
I'd imagine the average nerdy guy from the black underclass is far more concerned with mistaken identity on his way home, than he is with being accosted because he is smart.
But again, I'd like to know if I'm way off here.
The kids from the underclass don't worry about being a 'nerd' or popular or whatever. As I said, I think they have far more pressing concerns. They worry about not setting off some gang banger by stepping on his shoe. Or having said gang banger mistake them for cross town rivals. Or having a police officer mistake their wallets for guns. You get the idea.
Whereas kids from the black upper class are a little different, and this is the part where I have to be careful. I think kids in the black upper class think that being 'cool' is being from the black under class. So they go out and do their best imitation of kids from the black underclass. Only they don't know much about the black underclass, so it comes off cartoonish. Only slightly less cartoonish than when white kids do it.
Since our 'interface' to black America is really the black upper class, we get the impression that acting cool is more important than being smart. That doesn't necessarily mean that kids in the black under class believe that. My suspicion is that we don't really know what those kids believe, and we'd be surprised to find just how pragmatic their beliefs are. I think it was Dr. Dre who said he didn't know any rappers who got rich selling music to the 'black under class'. I'm paraphrasing there, but again, you get his point.
As I mentioned, this is all a very subjective discussion, and generalities are generally wrong. Having said that, the black communities have all the usual cliques: nerd, jock, preppy, musician, etc. and schools which value some cliques over others.
Speaking of an "average" school is as misleading as speaking of an "average" parent (insert the usual joke about half a bra and half a jock strap).
p.s. I think Dr Dre was pointing out that the "poor & urban" niche is not a particularly lucrative one, thus the need to appeal to the mainstream.
No, My great-grandfather emigrated to Canada from Barbados and my great-grandmother was from Jamaica. This means I am probably a great- great- great- grandson of British Slavery.
I'm going to hypothesize that there is a correlation between unpopularity of nerds and the probability of success through intelligence. The less likely it is that people will become successful by being smart the more likely people will try to be successful by being popular. In the competition to become popular the first ones to lose are the ones who don't care about being popular: nerds.
There are a lot more examples of smart and successful blacks and hispanics now than there were a generation ago. I bet that black nerds will become more popular soon. Of course, they'll still be unpopular because they're nerds.
I quite agree. More generally, it's about increasing one's social ranking in relation to others. And culture (not limited to ethnic) plays a huge part in that.
Someone posted earlier that a kid would be popular if he were simply better than others at something. But this disregards culture, not just black, either. (I noticed the same thing in the schools I went to - British and all white).
For instance, certain strands of hip-hop seem to laud brash and expensive jewelery. If a kid grows up with this influence, he will internalise this and laud anyone he sees who exhibits similar property. He would not think to do the same with anyone who announces he has read a certain book because he has not grown up to laud this achievement, because of his exposure to this micro-culture.
Excellent article by the way!
2. If we're 'experts' about spotting people who are too stupid, then why do we mistake oddness for stupidity?
3. Your grammar is also poor - e.g., 'to stupid to mate with'.
You might not like that, but that doesn't affect whether it's true or not.
The result is that black people are expected to excel at the physical. When they don't (instead favoring the intellectual) they're viewed as not making use of this gift.
2. Leadership is contextual to the purpose of a group. A great soccer player is likely to be a leader on a soccer team, but if she is a bad musician, she won't be a leader in a band, no matter how charismatic or likeable she is.
3. Popularity is leadership without authority.
4. Lacking an external evaluation function, a group implicitly invents one.
This implies that nerds would actually be popular in groups with an evaluation function for smartness.
The solution is to create critical masses of people brought together in the context of a need to be smart.
For example, this is wrong: HE SAID>>>For blacks, it goes above and beyond just clothes — sneakers (Air Force ones, Jordans, etc.), jewelry, hairstyle, shape ups, belt buckles, chains, tattoos, diamond studs, do rags, fitted caps — which makes popularity that much more exclusive and more difficult to attain.<<<
Are you kidding me? Where where you on the 4th of July when black folk of all economic backgrounds were out cooking out outside across America, with their families and enjoying Being a Family my Friend?
And he said: >>If you ever watch a black family (and this holds trues from Latinos whom I’ve spent time with as well) they spend much more time worrying about the material and outwardly appearance — driving the right car, clothes, accessories, hair, etc. Paul alludes several times throughout the essay (and indeed, in his response,<<
Naw, this ain't right either because my son, aged 16 (and we all black right) spent a lot of time learning how to drive Boston streets, thru downtown, into Cambridge, past Somerville and back to our burbs and all the way along we discussed why all the music he was playing on the car CD sounded to me like "FALL OUT BOY" or "HAWTHORNE HEIGHTS" and he said -- Daddy now, its all original! His playlist has several hundred tracks, mostly different bands...
"I know it is but I'm sorry son, I said, but with some exceptions in the tracks playing, I haven't heard anything original from your 52 track playlist, that to me did not sound like FALL OUT BOY or HAWTHORNE HEIGHTS."
So, he defended it over and over and said - "No, they don't 'em sound like them dad." Yeah, right. I listen to over a hundred new tracks every month, all genres and I do know better!!
I was itching to get some RAP/HIP HOP even if it was that hypnotic track by Lil Wayne talking about Lolipops.
Personally, I love the FOB, HH stuff but I don't want to give overdue credits to their copiers! Well, he does and so went the discussion.
That's a small diverse taste of Black Life from BLACK NERDS in America Mr. davidadewumi! Your piece screamed of a lack of diversity in the African American American family.
So, you are right and you are so wrong too, which is my ultimate conclusion -- you like a viewpoint that adequately explains how diverse we all are, no matter what color we are.
Why are black kids who wear tight clothes unpopular?
Why are black kids who listen to heavy metal unpopular?
Why are black male virgins unpopular?
If you do unpopular stuff then you will not be popular. Interesting article, but way off base. Oh, and if you are wondering, I’m BLACK.
Nerd: Very Smart, socially inept
Geek: Smart, somewhat socially competent
Dork: Not smart, socially inept
That also explains why most people prefer to be called geeks.
Currently the issue isn't whether you are black, white, hispanic, or whatever. It's whether you are male or female. Women have taken over in the high schools and colleges. University enrollment is almost 2/3rds female nationwide and the gap is growing.....
Our problem right now isn't race, it's gender. Boys are dropping out in droves and at very early ages.
If you go into any government office right now you will see most of the employees will be women. I routinely go into offices now where there will be 20 or 30 women working and zero men. The men serve as janitors and gardeners. It's all they are qualified for.
Problem is getting worse and public school administrators are totally blind to the issue.
It is a legitimate question to ask, and unfortunately it demands an examination of those obvious differences like ". . . whether you are black, white, hispanic, or whatever . . ."
I agree with you, male-female disparities should be discussed as well. Perhaps you could start another topic?
The cool kids are the ones that do things their own way. By virtue of that, they get to lead. If I were in a 2 seater plane that crashes on an island that has a dinosaur on it, I'd prefer to have a non-confirmist rebel type with me instead of a shake-in-my-boots where-is-my-teacher type!
That's nerd versus cool. Conformist vs Rebel.
On your dinosaur-island, the nerd probably knows how to find clean water, build a shelter, start a fire, and set a trap. And how to make a dinosaur-slaying weapon from the wreckage of your plane.
Sounds like a lot more help than some "non-conformist" who doesn't know anything outside of the High School popularity game.
I understand pg's argument that you have to work at being popular. In my (Indian) school, I was a typical nerd - I was poor, often wore uniforms from my previous years, I loved to read, and couldn't bother to spend the time socializing. There were a few others like me and a few widely popular, athletic, rich kids.
But we never got picked on for "being nerds"! Never! If anything, we got respect for being good at our work. It didn't make us popular but we had good friends (hell I had my share of girls in high school) and overall an enjoyable experience.
Sure there were cases of bullying, but they were one-off. It was not nerd==target and even the bullying was handled pretty soon, either by us (as a group) or the teachers.
I really would like to know where this animosity towards nerds comes from. I think that's the interesting (and painful) part of American culture that needs probing. It's definitely not universal. Any ideas?
I'm not trying to over-generalize my experience, but I think that in this day and age, nerds are not picked on nearly as much as you might be led to believe by popular media. Perhaps 20 or even 10 years ago that was true, and now those individuals are the same ones who are writing the same old nerd clichés into modern-day settings.