Why nerds are unpopular in high school?

College Confidential Community
21

<p>The smart girls rule my school--boys don't really factor in (that's probably just my particular school, this isn't a sexist assertion). But they have to be the right degree of smartness. One or two APs, enough to keep the GPA around 3.9. They belong to Student Venture ("Jesus Club"). They wear the 'in' clothes, have highlights in their hair, and have the pick of the male population. This is a total generalization, but it's what I see.</p>

<p>The really brilliant kids, on the other hand, get squashed like bugs. There's cool smart and there's geeky smart. I'm in the latter categroy. People don't dislike me, exactly, my name is well-known enough to inspire ejaculations of "Geeze, is there anything she doesn't do?" But I'm not popular. I agree with the author of the article the OP put a link to: nerds like me aren't popular because we don't put our efforts into being popular. The top girls at my school relegate some of their talents to making posters for dances and spray-painting their hair the school colors. If they concentrated solely on academics, they would be much less powerful.</p>

22

<p>Well, if smart people are considered nerds, then nerds rule my school. Regular suburban public high school. Good football team. Cheerleaders have won state or something. But the AP/Honors students at my school assume any and all leadership positions. Thus, you know all the nerds because they keep EVERYTHING running. Newspaper, student council, class councils, captains in sports, yearbook, etc. I think it's most obvious on newspaper. I'm one of the EICs for the upcoming year and I was an editor last year, and all of the 20 or so editors are always really bright and end up going to top schools- Duke, Northwestern, and Yale are just some off the top of my head.</p>

23

<p>It's funny to read the differences between our schools.</p>

24

<p>Nerds are so unpopular because (at least at my school) they seem to lack social skills that other teenagers have that make them so charismatic. I'm not personally drawn to awkward pauses and the like.</p>

<p>EDIT: I just read that article and the author is still a nerd. The popular kids don't "work at" being popular, it's just something that happens. Trying to become popular is the worst thing someone can do, it's just so obvious when someone is acting fake.</p>

25

<p>I second that notion. The really really really popular kids just have something about them, but they're not even trying.</p>

26

<p>I don't know what it is, but I can always tell the first time I meet someone whether or not they're a "nerd". To me, I think it's really about whether or not one is, for lack of a better term, "socially retarded".</p>

27

<p>I agree with that article: being "popular" takes a lot of effort and time. Some of the most popular people in my school (meaning that they know LOTS of people from outside of school) spend every spare minute partying or hanging out. I do that stuff too, but not every weekend, and it usually exhausts me because you're out all night, being social, etc.</p>

28

<p>well, at least at my school, they like that stuff. And the same kids have been popular since kindergarden (for the most part we've all traveled throughout school together)</p>

29

<p>

Either that or they are just really good at it.</p>

<p>

Sounds interesting... (C'mon, you knew someone was going to do this.)</p>

30

<p>I disagree with this article becasue I have seen many smart/nerdy kids that are popular. Being well-liked by others is mutually exclusive to being intelligent because popularity is based on one's own charisma or social graces.</p>

31

<p>I've noticed that as I've gotten older, the distinction between the popular kids and the unpopular has lessened over the years. Back in elementary, it was very defined; the popular kids simply did not talk to the unpopular kids unless absolutely necessary. Then, gradually in junior high, few people actually cared. At my school, the smart kids weren't necessarily in the popular group (some were, some weren't), but they were respected by the other kids.</p>

32

<p>My school is nerd friendly too..because 80% are nerds..ok i'll just say very intelligent people. Most of the people at my school look like regular people and are very outgoing and spontaneous. They are just as popular as anybody else. No nerd abuse here.</p>

33

<p>Coming from a kid with a 21 ACT, and considered a jock. I would say it's because they just don't look good. It's rare to find a hot person of the opposite sex taking AP classes. That's why I made a thread about how to do do good in AP English, because there is a hot girl in there. Which is rare, IMO.</p>

34

<p>lol...</p>

<p>you mean... how to do WELL in AP English? </p>

<p>;)</p>

35

<p>CDN dancer, that's like how my school life has been like!</p>

<p>In elementary, my group actually had a rival group.. and us 2 groups competed against each other (cheerleading, gymnastics, soccer, netball) for the 'popular group' group.</p>

<p>In junior high, (this may sound snobby) I was IN the cool group. We dominated the school haha. but it was lax - there was no sucking up to us or anything like in elementary school.</p>

<p>Now in high school, there is no hierachy.. Everyone is just friendly with everyone...............except for those weirdos who carry around a laptop and go to the library and study every lunchtime.. They don't have the socialising skills i think.. they are very vague when talking -- like, as if we are not smart enough for them! I like to feel sorry for them in a way..</p>

36

<p>Nobody wants to be nerdy -- a lot of people in this are saying, "Oh well the nerds are actually popular... there is no hierachy..." and blah blah blah... but I have a hard time believing it. People who say that there is no hierachy are generally the ones at the top, but I bet if you talked to someone who might be considered "a nerd" they would think differently. </p>

<p>The thing I didn't like about the article was it said that nerds are bullied, made fun, etc. but it fails to recognize the subtle ways that nerds are classified as nerds. Usually people in high school have moved pass the pointing, laughing, and stuffing the nerds into lockers -- instead, it's more like they're not invited to parties (as someone said), or don't have anyone to sit with at lunch.</p>

<p>And, a lot of people have mentioned that the popular people are smart, take AP's, and whatnot, but there is a definite difference between just general intelligence and being a nerd.</p>

37

<p>We don't have nerds at my school well actually we do but they are really popular. They don't simply take ap classes they excel in them and are star students, national merit finalists, etc. The "nerds" at my school are popular because they are socially competent and generally just laidback. However, we do have social outcasts who generally make themselves that way. We try talk to these people but they act superior to us for reasons unknown and we tend to ignore them as a result.</p>

38

<p>I agree the type of nerds that have excellent social skills, the ones that still go out and have fun, are involved in numerous extracurriculars are considered popular. However, there are the ones that really do act nerdy, dress nerdy, and talk really nerdy, and don't do anything else but study. They are involved in no extracurriculars and never have fun. They have no social skills and that is why they are unpopular. However 99% of the nerds at my school are the 1st type.</p>

39

<p>I think the difference between the popular and outcast nerds is the individual's approachability. The only reason why the outcasts are aloof is their eccentric interests. I mean, it's true, the popular nerds might have some hobbies that arent' considered "the norm," but all of those kids actually have some common ground with everyone else. That's why they can get through conversations without the overly-awkward pauses. The outcasts that would much rather talk about the robotics competition (no offense to anyone interested in this field) that they participated in over the weekend than the latest results of last night's American Idol don't compromise their interest for the good of the conversation. Therefore, the outcast kids don't seem as approachable or interesting, when in fact, no one outside their circle of friends has even peaked their interests.</p>

<p>wow that came out pretty rigid. sorry about that.</p>

40

<p>imacrazyscientistThe type of nerds that have excellent social skills, the ones that still go out and have fun, are involved in numerous extracurriculars are considered popular. However, there are the ones that really do act nerdy, dress nerdy, and talk really nerdy, and don't do anything else but study. They are involved in no extracurriculars and never have fun. They have no social skills and that is why they are unpopular. </p>

<p>Yeah, that makes sense. The kids in the same core of APs+ECs+Positions tend to form spheres of socializing, studying, activities and friendships and since my class is less than 200, they ARE the face of c/o 2006 and are naturally considered popular. </p>

<p>CHH0723*I think the difference between the popular and outcast nerds is the individual's approachability. The only reason why the outcasts are aloof is their eccentric interests. I mean, it's true, the popular nerds might have some hobbies that arent' considered "the norm," but all of those kids actually have some common ground with everyone else. That's why they can get through conversations without the overly-awkward pauses.</p>

<p>The outcasts that would much rather talk about the robotics competition (no offense to anyone interested in this field) that they participated in over the weekend than the latest results of last night's American Idol don't compromise their interest for the good of the conversation. Therefore, the outcast kids don't seem as approachable or interesting, when in fact, no one outside their circle of friends has even peaked their interests.*</p>

<p>Your first batch of statements ring true. Anyone outside the norm of activities or interests of the main AP-mob at schools (who are just as smart or smarter) will feel alienation and inability to relate to the said people. </p>

<p>At my school, I have difficulty relating to dances, prom, and gossip of any sort simply because they are out of my tastes and so that does leave me a sore thumb for the majority of kids do those sorts of things. It is true that I have not been able to have hour-long conversations of the people I lump together and also, acknowledge the differences in their personalities and what peaks their interests that are, of course, floating out of the norm of which I stereotype them or lump them together - but I must first acknowledge that first impressions run deep (both sides) and that this tension will exist to separate the rigid stereotypes from the sides that have been mentioned in previous posts (i.e. overall, well-rounded smart vs. outcasted nerd). </p>

<p>And no, I am not trying to sound superior to what "the well-rounded norm" deem fun and exciting - I completely respect their interests but it is very difficult if I wanted to strike a conversation about any of my interests lest I want to seem pompous, condescending, erudite, and seemingly above my age-group because of a strange set of well, likes and dislikes. If I were to recite the names of the amino acids (fairly basic idea) and talked about alphabet soup and proteins, I could fool people into believing I'm brilliant - which is far from true - by carefully inflecing my language, wearing the coke-bottle glasses, and looking disgruntled, frustrated, messy, and passionate. (And, I did this unintentionally with a complete different set of facts - leaving me looking incredibly unapproachable and intimidating - which is unfounded for I am far from being a PhD candidate or anything worth similar merit/achievement.) First impressions are incredibly strong. </p>

<p>I must also acknowledged that pretenses of the aforementioned will create an invisible tension between members of the stereotypes groups - there will be a certain expectation in the flow of conversation and hence, will inhibit open-mindedness - for who can truly speak freely and willingly to persons they have already labeled and confined within the said persons expectations? It is a difficult situation and takes some time on both parts for the groups to be understood - if that is even wanted in the first place because of the existing impressions that have been reiterated.</p>

<p>**The overall concept of the post could have been labeled under something involving stereotypes, perception, existing notions, and finally, general views evolved over time and possibilities of smashing one idea for a completely new one under different basis. ---> Misunderstandings.</p>