Are Fake Geeks Dooming Real Ones? 492
mattnyc99 writes "In the wake of the Best Buy 'geek' trademarking and Miss USA calling herself 'a huge history geek,' writer (and self-proclaimed geek) Eryn Green has an interesting piece for Esquire on how so-called 'geek chic' is pervading the culture so much that no one appreciates an actual geek anymore. From the article: 'The difference between brains and beauty is that you're more or less born into good looks — entitled, if you will. Intelligence? That takes work. If the hallmark of real geekiness — of America — is determination, then we seem too determined to have an entitlement problem.'"
Nope (Score:5, Insightful)
Nobody apart from other geeks has ever appreciated an actual geek.
Nothings changed (Score:5, Insightful)
Nothings changed, nobody appreciated an actual geek to begin with.
real geekiness? (Score:5, Insightful)
If the hallmark of real geekiness — of America — is determination, then we seem too determined to have an entitlement problem.
LOLWUT? This statement makes no sense. It sounds like a perversion of a tea party truism. A salute to real American geekiness as our founding fathers envisioned!
In my mind true geeks apply an overabundance of detailed knowledge to an overly technical project that wouldn't interest the general population. Count me in.
-sent from my TI-92 graphing calculator.
Faulty Premise (Score:4, Insightful)
Intelligence (Score:5, Insightful)
Intelligence takes work? First I've heard about that. Sure, utilising intelligence to create new things, undertake science, refine and present new ideas, learning, building etc -- they all take work. I.e. it takes work to use your intelligence to its full potential. But I don't think that's the same thing as saying "Intelligence? That takes work".
Are we assuming (Score:5, Insightful)
That Miss USA isn't a geek just because she is a girl, or is it because she is attractive?
I haven't met her myself, but isn't it actually quite possible that she is a history geek?
Beauty takes work.... (Score:2, Insightful)
The notion that JUST intelligence takes work is incredibly inaccurate.
Careful grooming, styling, exercise takes a tremendous amount of effort and practice.
The notion that your NOT born into intelligence is also incredibly inaccurate.
As much as we want to believe that ANYONE who wants to can achieve; not everyone can. There are skills that people are just gifted with, be it basketball, baseball, math, science, reading; these are all to the best of our understanding innate and intrinsic.
Now you may have someone who has the potential to be a beauty contestant winner who turns out to be a slob, or someone who could win the fields medal flipping burgers; the exception doesn't make the rule here.
You're not born with good looks (Score:5, Insightful)
Exercise, diet , makeup, hair removal, clothing, haircuts, healthcare, stress at work / school, sleeping habbits, alcohol , tobacco , dental care, etc ...
People seriously underestimate how much of a person's appearance is due to lifestyle factors and how much time you are willing to put into it. Yes, there are genetic factors, but frankly there is a heck of a lot of it that can actually be described in terms of effort.
Re:Nothings changed (Score:3, Insightful)
Why would anyone appreciate someone who bites the heads off of chickens? Oh right, the story is apparently only referring to fake geeks not actual geeks (carnival performers who do gross acts).
Re:Nothings changed (Score:5, Insightful)
They always take that for granted and get pissed at you if you refuse to give them free service. At least, that's been my experience. So no, they don't really appreciate you.
And not a single **** was given (Score:4, Insightful)
Who cares? I don't devote myself to the geek arts for mainstream acceptance. I do it because shit gotta get hacked.
Re:Solution (Score:5, Insightful)
And they will explain to you why your non expert test is really not a good way to test if someone is geeky in this particular subject. They will then spend an hour or so providing you with a better set of 10 questions and writing up a multi-page answer for each one.
That's when you know you are dealing with a geek.
False (Score:4, Insightful)
Intelligence can be optimized with effort, but I think it's more something you're born with or not. I hate to be like that, but I think that some people are just smarter than others. (There is a HUGE difference between just being smart and what you do with it, however- nature vs. nurture, etc).
Nowadays, it is a pop-culture trend. Dumb chicks running around with the horn rimmed glasses because they want to look smart. Everyone THINKS they are geniuses. The self-esteem boosting tactics of the 90s have worked tremendously. Loads of Dunning-Kreuger effect abounds. The younger kids are calling themselves "nerds", which is something I or people my age probably never would have done. You didn't *want* to be a nerd in the 1980s. You hated yourself for it. The only solace you got out of it was watching NOVA or reruns of the original Star Trek with your friends, if you had any.
Okay... I'll stop here before I get bitter.
You are basically born with intelligence too (Score:5, Insightful)
I always find it odd that smart people think those who work out 10 hours a week, eat carefully, and take effort in upkeeping their appearance are just born with their looks. But then when they are able to breeze through school without studying and learn new things with little effort, that takes real skill.
I have done alot of tutoring along the years, and have seen people who work alot harder than me struggle on topics that came very naturally for me. I am not conceited enough to think I am successful just because of my hard work, while those who are successful because of "just" their looks had everything handed to them. I have had my fair share of luck too. Almost every very smart person I know (the "actual" geeks the article is mentioning) was largely born with the ability to learn faster than most people. Sure most of them worked hard too, but usually not as hard as the people who struggled through College Algebra.
The abilities you are born with are also going to primarily determine the areas you work on developing. If you are born athletic, you are more likely to spend effort on physical activities because it will provide you the most immediate payoff. And if you are born with higher intelligence, you will spend more time reading books.
Re:Are we assuming (Score:4, Insightful)
Really, so people who love the civil war and collect artifacts from it and do battle re-enactments aren't geeks?
That sounds like prime history geekery to me, they are passionate, they know far more than average about the subject and "normal" people who don't share this particular passion really don't want to hear them drone on for hours about how some particular battle went.
Re:Are we assuming (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm sorry, but this is bullshit. Pretty people do not get some "automatic free pass for life". There's a very small number of people with the requisite drive, talents, and ambition to be actresses/actors/models/etc - professionally pretty people. The vast majority of "pretty girls" are faced with a choice between improving their minds so they can get a job which will let them support themselves, or stripping at a club out by the airport. Your argument suggests that only ugly people would ever be motivated to be smart, and pretty people would only motivated to remain pretty so they can keep coasting on their looks.
A look around any modern workplace would disabuse you of this notion. I work with some absolute stunners - two of whom majored in actuarial math and biomedical engineering, respectively. This notion that "ugly = smart" and "pretty = dumb" is retarded - there are plenty of very good looking, very smart people; there are plenty of very bad looking, very dumb people. The two are entirely unrelated characteristics, and attempting to force some correlation between the two simply betrays the biases of the person making that assertion.