in reply to Re^3: Please remember that geeks have their own social mores.
in thread Please remember that geeks have their own social mores.

Geeks don't do sports or sports fanism.

I still use the definition of geek as it related to the distinction between nerds and dorks that I learned back in high school.

A dork is a social outcast. They lack all physical and social grace. While they may enjoy D&D, they have no exceptional intelligence. They are awkward in every way.

Nerds are also socially and physically inept. The distinction, a nerd has a well above average intelligence.

A geek is someone that you could sit next to at a bar and have no idea that they are a rocket scientist. They may not excel at sports or in the art of eloquent speech, but they don't stand out enough to initiate ridicule.

I tend to find the profile of J Random Hacker quite accurate and would point to Physical Activity And Sports. It has been several years since I did anything resembling physical activity - but long distance running used to be my sport of choice.

Cheers - L~R

  • Comment on Re^4: Please remember that geeks have their own social mores.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: Please remember that geeks have their own social mores.
by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Feb 24, 2008 at 23:34 UTC

    To me, Jocks are Scotsmen; freshmen are not women, but chase them; and I've no idea what a sophomore is except through third hand context derived from TV and Hollywood.

    So it is, that all three of the terms you differentiate, are simply youthful Americanisms who's meanings I derive only through inference from the media. Vaguely insulting terms used by one adolecent tribe to describe members of another. Generally interchangable.

    I was a fairly competent gymnast, and I can still turn a handspring or cartwheel at will, despite my advancing years. Though the fear getting it wrong is an ever stronger deterant from proving that these days. I was also pretty good at Softball for the couple of years I had the opportunity to play.

    I would never ascribe myself as belonging to any of those tribes or sub-tribes. But then, I actively shun labels, and any form of categorisation. For myself or others.

    I recognise common traits in pairs or more of people, but also differences. And the latter have always intrigued me more than the former.

    Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
    "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
    In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.